Ethics:

Its Definition And Importance Have you experience a situation where it requires that you have to choose
on what to do and part of it is to decide which of the choices is right or wrong? Can you recall an
experience where you really felt bad and sad because you hurt somebody because of your wrong
action? Did you ever wonder why people need to be good and avoid what is evil? Did it ever come to
your mind why we need to be pleasing in our action? There are many people who ask why study ethics?
Why be moral? Webster’s dictionary has a number of definitions for moral including: - of or relating to
principles of right and wrong in behavior - conforming to a standard of right behavior. This is an
important question for a course on ethics - is being moral important to you, why (or why not)? Most
people think doing well in life is associated with being “good”. (philonotes.com) For example: do you
think a person who gains money dishonestly is a success? Is a politician who beats his wife and children
a success? Is Mother Theresa a success - she had very few of the things society commonly associates
with doing well. Most people like fairness, justice, truthfulness, compassion in society. Ethics help give
direction to societies and people who think they cannot flourish without some form of morality.

Morality is said to be breaking down in society today - juvenile crime, drug abuse, alcoholism, teenage
pregnancies, crime rates - all seem to indicate that the moral fabric of society is breaking down. Moral
questions are at the heart of life’s vital issues - including those affected by the actions above. “Morality
is primarily concerned with the questions of right and wrong, the ability to distinguish between the two,
and the justification of the distinction. (phlionotes.com) Montemayor (1994) mentions in his
introduction on his book Ethics: The Philosophy of Life that Ethics is the philosophy of life and that it
delves into the deepest whys and wherefore of human existence, men’s actions, problems and destiny.
He further mentions that to live well and happy, we must know what we are living for. He says this is
taught by Ethics that investigates the meaning and purpose of human life. He mentions that according to
Socrates the unexamined life is not worth living for man. Montemayor (1994) also states that Plato one
of the greatest philosophers of all times proclaimed Ethics as the supreme science, the highest in the
hierarchy of human values, as it is Ethics that is concerned with the attainment of life’s greatest Good
and Goal – Happiness.

Definitions of Ethics The book of Montemayor (1994) provides the following definitions of Ethics:

1. Ethics is the practical science of the morality of human actions.

2. Ethics is the science of human acts with reference to right and wrong

3. Ethics is the scientific inquiry into the principles of morality.

4. Ethics is the study of the rectitude of human conduct

5. Ethics is the human conduct from the standpoint of morality.

6. Ethics is the science which lays down the principles of right living

7. Ethics is the practical science that guides us in our actions that we may live rightly and well.

8. Ethics is normative and practical science, based on reason, which studies human conduct and provides
norm for its natural integrity and honesty.

9. According to Socrates, ethics is the investigation of life.

1. Science-systematic study or a system of scientific conclusions clearly demonstrated, derived from

2. Morality – the quality of human acts as right, wrong or indifferent, moral immoral or amoral.

3. Human acts –acts done with knowledge, freedom and free will or consent.

Importance Of Ethics Montemayor (1994) proclaims that the importance of the study of ethics follows
immediately from the importance of ethics itself. His idea is manifested in the following:

1. Ethics means right living and good moral character and it is in good moral character that man
finds his true worth and perfection. All the great teachers of the ages maintain that the supreme
purpose of human living lies not in the acquisition of material good or bodily pleasures, nor in
the attainment of bodily perfections such as health and strength; nor even in the development
of intellectual skills but in the development of the moral qualities which lift man far above brute
creation.
2. Education is the harmonious development of the whole man-of all ma’s faculties: the moral,
intellectual, and physical powers in man. Now then highest of man’s power are his reason and
will. Hence, the primary objective of education is the moral 15 development of the will

B. Rules And Its Importance To Social Beings (lifted from the book of De Guzman, (2017) -Ethics:
Principles of Ethical Behaviour in Modern Society) You find rules everywhere. But did you ever ask
yourself why you need to follow them? Try to recall an experience where you followed a rule and assess
what you did. Did you just follow it without asking yourself why you need to follow it? Did you have any
doubt about following it? Rules refer to explicit or understood regulations or principles governing
conduct within a specific activity or sphere. Rules tell us what is or is not allowed in a particular context
or situation. In many ways, rules serve as a foundation for any healthy society. Without rules, society
would like fall into anarchy.

Rules benefit social beings in various manners:

1. Rules protect social beings by regulating behaviour. Rules build boundaries that place limits on
behaviour. Rules are usually coupled with means to impose consequences on those who violate
them. One of the reasons people follow accepted rules is to avoid negative consequences.
2. Rules help to guarantee each person certain right and freedom. Rules form frameworks for
society. Nations are generally nations of laws and the governing principles are outlined in what
is called constitution. Because the majority has agreed to follow and consent to be governed by
such a constitution, the freedoms outlined exist.
3. Rules produce a sense of justice among social beings. Rules are needed in order to keep the
strong from dominating the weak that is to prevent exploitation and domination. Without rules,
schemes in which those with the power control the system, would take over. In effect, rules
generate a stable system that provides justice, in which even the richest and the most powerful
 have limitations on what they can do. If they transgress rules such as laws and ordinances and
take advantage of people, there are consequences both socially and criminally.
4. Rules are essential for a healthy economic system. Without rules regulating business, power
would centralize around monopolies and threaten the strength and competitiveness of the
system. Rules are needed to ensure product safety, employee’s safety and product quality.
Copyright and patents help protect people’s intellectual property. Rules and regulations also
keep the banking system stable so as to avoid depression and the like.

In short, society could not soundly functions without rules and regulations. Rules are necessary to
protect the greater good. Even the freest societies ought to have rules in order to avoid
exploitations and tyranny while 16 upholding the common good.

C. Moral Standards versus Non-moral Standards (lifted from the book of De Guzman, (2017) -Ethics:
Principles of Ethical Behaviour in Modern Society)

Do you know the meaning of standards? Have you been in a situation where you were chosen because
you met the standards or you were disregarded because you did not meet the standards? But are you
aware that there are different kinds of standards and the kind is dependent on their implication or effect
on people and situations? Why do you think there is the need to distinguish moral standards from non-
moral ones? It is important to note that different societies have different moral beliefs and that our
beliefs are deeply influenced by our own culture and context. For this reason, some values do have
moral implications, while others don’t. Let us consider, for example, the wearing of hijab. For sure, in
traditional Muslim communities, the wearing of hijab is the most appropriate act that women have to
do in terms of dressing up. In fact, for some Muslims, showing parts of the woman’s body, such as the
face and legs, is despicable. However, in many parts of the world, especially in Western societies, most
people don’t mind if women barely cover their bodies. As a matter of fact, the Hollywood canon of
beauty glorifies a sexy and slim body and the wearing of extremely daring dress. The point here is that
people in the West may have pitied the Muslim women who wear hijab, while some Muslims may find
women who dress up daringly despicable. Again, this clearly shows that different cultures have different
moral standards. What is a matter of moral indifference, that is, a matter of taste (hence, non-moral
value) in one culture may be a matter of moral significance in another. Now, the danger here is that one
culture may impose its own cultural standard on others, which may result in a clash in cultural values
and beliefs. When this happens, as we may already know, violence and crime may ensue, such as
religious violence and ethnic cleansing. This is where the importance of understanding the difference
between moral standards (that is, of what is a moral issue) and non-moral ones (that is, of what is a non-
moral issue―thus, a matter of taste) comes in. This issue may be too obvious and insignificant for some
people, but understanding the difference between the two may have far-reaching implications. For one,
once we have distinguished moral standards from non-moral ones, of course, through the aid of the
principles and theories in ethics, we will be able to identify fundamental ethical values that may guide
our actions. Indeed, once we know that particular values and beliefs are non-moral, we will be able to
avoid running the risk of falling into the pit of cultural reductionism (that is, taking complex cultural
issues as simple and homogenous ones) and the unnecessary imposition of one’s own cultural standard
on others. The point here is that if such standards are non-moral (that is, a matter of taste), then we
don’t have the right to impose them on others. But if such standards are moral ones, such as not killing
or harming people, then we may have the right to force others to act accordingly. In this way, we may
be able to find a common moral ground, such as agreeing not to steal, lie, cheat, kill, harm, and deceive
our fellow human beings. Now, what are moral standards, and how do they differ from non-moral ones?

Moral Standards and their Characteristics Moral standards are norms that individuals or groups have
about the kinds of actions believed to be morally right or wrong, as well as the values placed on what we
believed to be morally good or morally bad. Moral standards normally promote “the good”, that is, the
welfare and well-being of humans as well as animals and the environment. Moral standards, therefore,
prescribe what humans ought to do in terms of rights and obligations. According to some scholars,
moral standards are the sum of combined norms and values. In other words, norms plus values equal
moral standards. On the one hand, norms are understood as general rules about our actions or
behaviors. For example, we may say “We are always under the obligation to fulfil our promises” or “It is
always believed that killing innocent people is absolutely wrong”. On the other hand, values are
understood as enduring beliefs or statements about what is good and desirable or not. For example, we
may say “Helping the poor is good” or “Cheating during exams is bad”

According to many scholars, moral standards have the following characteristics, namely:

1) Moral standards deal with matters we think can seriously injure or benefit humans, animals, and
the environment, such as child abuse, rape, and murder;
2) Moral standards are not established or changed by the decisions of authoritative individuals or
bodies. Indeed, moral standards rest on the adequacy of the reasons that are taken to support
and justify them. For sure, we don’t need a law to back up our moral conviction that killing
innocent people is absolutely wrong;
3) Moral standards are overriding, that is, they take precedence over other standards and
considerations, especially of self-interest;
4) Moral standards are based on impartial considerations. Hence, moral standards are fair and just;
and
5) moral standards are associated with special emotions (such as guilt and shame) and vocabulary
(such as right, wrong, good, and bad).

Non-moral Standards

Non-moral standards refer to standards by which we judge what is good or bad and right or wrong in a
non-moral way. Examples of non-moral standards are standards of etiquette by which we judge
manners as good or bad, standards we call the law by which we judge something as legal or illegal, and
standards of aesthetics by which we judge art as good or rubbish. Hence, we should not confuse
morality with etiquette, law, and aesthetics or even with religion. As we can see, non-moral standards
are matters of taste or preference. Hence, a scrupulous observance of these types of standards does not
make one a moral person. Violation of said standards also does not pose any threat to human well-
being. Finally, as a way of distinguishing moral standards from non-moral ones, if a moral standard says
“Do not harm innocent people” or “Don’t steal”, a non-moral standard says “Don’t text while driving” or
“Don’t talk while the mouth is full”.

D. Dilemma and Moral Dilemma (lifted from the book of De Guzman, (2017) -Ethics: Principles of Ethical
Behaviour in Modern Society)
Do you have any idea of what a dilemma is? Have you ever encountered a situation where you need to
choose between two alternatives, yet choosing any could lead to a negative consequence on what you
did not choose? What did you do? How did you feel? The term dilemma refers to a situation in which a
tough decision has to be made between two or more options, especially more or less equally
undesirable ones. Not all dilemmas are moral dilemmas. Also called ‘ethical dilemmas’, moral dilemmas
are situation in which a difficult choice has to be made between two courses of action, either of which
entails transgressing a moral principle. At the very least, a moral dilemma involves conflicts between
moral requirements.

What is common to moral dilemmas is conflict. In each ethical dilemma, an agent regards himself as
having moral reasons to do each of two actions, but doing both actions seems to be ethically not
possible. The key features of a moral dilemma are these:

a.) the agent is required to do each of two (or more) actions;

b.) the agent can do each of the actions; but the agent cannot do both (or all ) of the actions. In a moral
dilemma, the agent thus seems condemned to moral failure no matter what he does, he will do
something wrong, or fail to do something that he ought to do. Some ethicists propose that when one of
the conflicting moral requirements overrides the other, the case is not a ‘genuine moral dilemma’. Thus
in addition to the features mentioned above, in order to have a genuine moral dilemma, some add that
it must also the case that

c) neither of the conflicting moral requirements is overridden.

Three Levels of Moral Dilemma

Moral Dilemmas can be categorized according to these levels:

1. Personal Dilemmas. Personal Dilemmas are those experienced and resolved on the personal
level. Since many ethical decisions are personally made, many if not most of moral dilemmas fall
under, or boil down to this level. If a person makes conflicting promises, he faces a moral
conflict. When an individual has to choose between the life of a child who is about to be
delivered and the child’s mother, he faces an ethical dilemma.
2. Organizational Dilemma. Organizational moral dilemmas refer to ethical cases encountered and
resolves by social organization. This category includes moral dilemmas in business, medical
fields and public sector.
A medical institution which believes that human life should not be deliberately shortened and
that unpreventable pain should not be tolerated encountered a conflict in resolving whether to
withdraw life support from a dying patient. This is common moral dilemma faced by healthcare
organizations. Administrative bodies in business are confronted with situations in which several
courses of action are possible but none of them provide a totally successful outcome to those
affected by the decision or actions taken. Moral dilemmas in business involve issues about
corporate practices, policies, business behaviors, and the conducts and relationships of
individuals in the organizations. In a public sector, government leaders and employees have a
moral duty to act in a manner that is fair and unbiased, that is loyal to the public by putting
public interest, accountability and transparency. In fulfilling these responsibilities, public officials
 may encounter foreseeable moral dilemmas. These dilemmas include whether or not to favour
family, friends, or campaign contributors over other constituents; favoring the agenda of one’s
political party over a policy one believes to be good for the community; dealing with conflicting
public duties inherent in serving both as a council member and as a member of an agency or
commission; resigning from organizations in which membership may give rise to future conflicts;
becoming a whistle blower even if it means potentially derailing a policy objective one is
pursuing; and accepting gifts if it is legally permitted but creates the appearance of impropriety.
3. Structural Dilemmas. Structural moral dilemmas refer to cases involving network of institutions
and operative theoretical paradigms. As they usually encompass multi-sectoral institutions and
organizations, they may be larger in scope and extent than organizational dilemmas.
Case in point is the prices of medicine in the Philippines which are higher compared to other
countries in Asia and in countries of similar economic status. Factors affecting medicine prices
include cost of research, presence of competition in the market, government regulations, and
patent protection. Institutions concerned may want to lower the costs of medicine, thereby
benefiting the Filipino public, but such a move may ruin the interests of the involved
researchers, inventors or discoverers, and pharmaceutical companies which own the patent of
the medicines or healthcare technologies.

E. Only human beings can be Ethical (lifted from the book of De Guzman, (2017) -Ethics: Principles of
Ethical Behaviour in Modern Society)

Oftentimes we experience something that test our being and often also we wonder whether we deserve
to be the highest form of animal. If we commit something, we often hear “animal ka”. But we are as
Aristotle say “rational animals”. We are animals minus the rationality. Another basic tenet in ethics is
the belief that only human beings can truly be ethical. Most philosophies hold that unlike animals,
human beings possess some traits that make it possible for them to be moral. Only human beings are
rational, autonomous, and self-conscious. The qualities of rationality, autonomy, and self-consciousness
are believed to confer a full and equal moral status to those that possess them as these beings are the
only ones capable of achieving certain moral values.