Chapter 2.

Act 1

Based on your experience, how does your family differ from other families in your place. List down these
differences and compare it with your own.

 My family isn’t much different from any others except of some experiences I’ve had. My family
isn’t the best, nor is it the worst. I never claim to have a better/worse family than anyone
because you never really know what someone’s family is like unless they tell you. Sometimes
not even then. I’m in healthy, safe conditions and both of my families love me very much and
would never physically harm me to where I’m in danger, but I feel neglected sometimes, and
that’s the truth. At least I have two families to lean on.

Act 2

Identify one advantage and one disadvantage of cultural relativism and explain.

 It could promote a lack of diversity. Cultural relativism promotes an individualistic point of view,
so although it seems to promote diversity, it actually removes it from a society.

Act 3

List down some examples of cultural relativism which are bad in our society but good in other
society/country.

1. Corruption - This had a dramatic effect on the behavior of the population, by limiting access to
farmland to young marrieds who had demonstrated good character and suppressing the
reproduction (and increasing the starvation and disease) of those who were not.
2. Truth - This spectrum describes truth as serving the political interests of everyone (western), the
social interests of everyone (eastern), and the familial interests of everyone.

Chapter 2.4

Act 1

What makes Filipino culture different from another culture? Explain your answer.

 The Philippines has a very unique culture due to the influences of colonization and the
surrounding countries. Filipino people are very hardworking and strive to make life better for
the next generation of their family.

Act 2

As a student, how can you contribute to the propagation of Filipino culture? Values? List down your
answers and discuss this in class.

 Filipino culture has still stood as mostly in agriculture or industrial festivals, craftsman ships,
exotic culinary, utility manners, livelihood manifestations, entertainments, hospitalities, basic
traditions, classic arts, traditional arts, classic science and free arts. Each culture has expectedly
 had own sets of credited values as it depends on the individual artistry or a basic courtesy to
address submissive respects by someone or thou.

Act 3

Dramatize an event showing a social value of Filipinos

 The great majority of the Philippine population is bound together by common values and a
common religion. Philippine society is characterized by many positive traits. Among these are
strong religious faith, respect for authority, and high regard for amor proprio (self-esteem) and
smooth interpersonal relationships.

Act 4

1. Prepare a chart showing the positive and negative values of the Filipinos.
2. Can we transform the negative values to positive one? Explain your answer.
Positive Values:
Negative Values:

Chapter 3.1

Act 1

Identify five universal human values and explain each. Why are those values necessary for human
survival?

1. Love - love corresponds to the highest truth and the purest goodness. Where love is, selfishness is not
and joy is abundant.

2. Peace - a feeling of peace and contentment fills our hearts. These feelings respond with feelings of
harmony, happiness and profound gratitude.

3. Truth - To abide by truth means cultivating truthfulness, honesty and sincerity, self-analysis and
purity, accuracy and fairness, fearlessness and integrity.
4. Right Conduct - the highest level of Right Conduct results when we act in accordance with our
conscience and carry out thoughts and intentions that are rooted in love.

5. Nonviolence - a sense of morality, equality and respect for the rights of all human beings; it fosters
appreciation of all cultures and religions, as well as ecological concern and awareness.

Act 2

What is human dignity? Discuss why human dignity is important.

 Being conscious of the community in pursuit of human dignity can mean being respectful of
group rules, norms and fellow members, consequently emphasizing the entitlements of society
over those of the individual

Act 3

It is said that human existence is dependent of nature and its ecology. Why?

 Nature gifts many benefits to humans. From the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the
food we eat, nature enhances our wellbeing and freely provides the essentials for our survival.

Chapter 3.2

Act 1

Recall some of your defining moments in the formation of your moral character. Did it change your
personality as well as your outlook in life? How?

 When i first started college, i met so many amazing people who helped me through all my shit
without even realizing it. I never knew i was depressed until i took acid, if i never took acid, I
probably would still be shoving all of my feelings about things down.

Act 2

In one-whole sheet of paper, assess the negative character traits of one of your classmates based on
your observation. After making an assessment, interview him/her if he/she was able to change or
develop his/her character traits. How did she change his/her negative character into a positive one?
Act 3

What do you think will happen to our country if our youth will be lacking the necessary moral
ascendancy? Can we still rely on them as the hope of our motherland? Explain.

 Destroy the family, destroy societies, and ultimately, the nations. The media and Hollywood
constantly push perverse values onto our youths, such as drugs, alcohol, promiscuity, rebellion,
anarchy, and disrespectful attitudes.

Chapter 3.3

Act 1

How does moral development play in important role in our daily inter-actions? How does it help solve
moral dilemma?
  Moral development is an important part of the socialization process. Moral development
prevents people from acting on unchecked urges, instead considering what is right for society
and good for others

Act 2

What are the salient points of Gilligan’s argument against Kohlberg’s theory?

 Kohlberg found that more men reached this stage of moral reasoning than women and that men
tended to be heavily focused on justice. Gilligan criticized this theory, arguing that it was biased
in favor of men. In her own research, Gilligan found that women placed a stronger emphasis on
caring in moral decision making

Act 3

Why did Kohlberg choose all male respondents in his theory of moral development? If he included
female in his study, will it affect the results of his theory?

 Now, given that Kohlberg was fundamentally incorrect about his psychology of morality,
particularly the notion that more advanced moral reasoning leads to the ascension through the
various identified states, it certainly opens the door to the possibility that any claim concerning
the “deficiency of moral reasoning” of women compared to men will also be incorrect. Further,
any observations of differences between men and women passing through the various stages of
moral behavior (assuming those observations are even empirically accurate) could be accounted
for in a different way, having nothing to do with any deficiencies vis-a-vis men and women.

Chap 4.1

Act 1

1.) State the differences of the following items and write your answers on their respective columns:

a. Reason – Reason is the fundamental prospect we rely on to not become bias by feelings and emotion.
On the other hand, emotion allows us to act based on morals and to ensure that our ethical decisions
are not based on logical reasoning but also morally humane. Thus, reason and emotion work together to
determine our morality.

b. Feeling - The emotion tries to convince us that we deserve it. Emotions are essential in life since they
help us to decide. Given a dilemma, thanks to cognition we can imagine how we will feel if we take one
or another alternative, we advance the emotional state. It is also true that sometimes even being very
rational we are wrong, and then we wonder if we should have done what we wanted instead of what we
were advised by reasoning

c. Will – Free Will describes our capacity to make choices that are genuinely our own. With free will
comes moral responsibility – our ownership of our good and bad deeds. That ownership indicates that if
we make a choice that is good, we deserve the resulting rewards. If in turn we make a choice that is bad,
we probably deserve those consequences as well. In the case of a really bad choice, such as committing
murder, we may have to accept severe punishment.
2.) What if you have a conflict of interest in your work but it is not in an area critical or central to your
responsibilities. What are you going to do? Example, SolGen Calida's case with his security agency.

Answer: I would report it to my supervisor, so that everyone can make a decision on my participation —
honest, open, above-board. It is unfair to lay down false premises and then solicit comment from
Trillanes or anyone else

3.) Take a look on the ouster of Chief Justice Sereno, is it right to oust Sereno as Chief Justice of the
Supreme Court via Quo Warranto? What do you think would be your feelings if you were Sereno?

Answer: The main argument for her impeachment was that Sereno allegedly failed to declare her
statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN) in full during her 17-year teaching period at the
University of the Philippines College of Law (UPCL). It was found that respondent is ineligible to hold the
Chief Justice of the Supreme Court position for lack of integrity. I will feel be in shame because I practice
lack of integrity, dishonesty with my profession. I will not able to build the trust again with my fellow
colleagues.

Chapter 4.2

Act 1

In this activity, students discuss some of the ideals of Johne Locke’s Natural Rights.

1. Form small groups to discuss the meaning of the three natural rights of John Locke: “Life,
Liberty, and the Property.”
2. For each one of three rights, groups members should answer this question: What does this right
specifically refer to in our lives today?
3. The groups should then post their answers for the rest of the class to see.
4. Hold a general class discussion and vote, if necessary, to drop or keep the meanings that each of
the group has developed for the three rights.

Act 2

Compare and contrast the following: utilitarianism, deontology, and consequentialism. What are their
weaknesses?

consequentialism

Related to this objection is the claim that consequentialism is too demanding, for it seems to insist that
people constantly compare their most innocent activities with other actions they might perform, some
of which—such as fighting world poverty—might lead to a greater good, impartially considered. Another
objection is that the calculations that consequentialism demands are too complicated to make,
especially if—as in many but not all versions of consequentialism—they require one to compare the
happiness or preferences of many different people.
One of the weaknesses of the deontological theories is the conflict between specific duties and
individual rights

It is subjective, making it difficult to define right and wrong.

Deontology doesn’t include self-defense ideas.

It may be used for supernatural and religious excuses that do not benefit society

Utilitarianism devalues the importance of personal relationships. In some cases, following Utilitarianism
will force us to disregard those who are close to us.

Utilitarianism seeks to predict the consequences of an action, which is impossible.

Some claim Bentham committed the ‘naturalistic fallacy’ of deriving an ought from an is.

Utilitarianism fails to identify that we have certain duties or obligations to others.

Happiness is subjective. Whereas someone may find happiness in cake, another may find it in murder.

Using the hedonic calculus to calculate the greatest happiness for the greatest number is impractical.

Act 3

Virtue ethics states that only good people can make good moral decisions. Is this true? Conduct a
debate on this issue.

Chapter 4.3

Act1

Is mental frame reliable in decision-making? Why? Support your answer.

Individuals are influenced by diverse semantic explanations of the same issue and have varying risk
preferences when making judgments, which is known as the framing effect, showing that people make
decisions based on the potential value of losses and gains rather than the ultimate outcome. In
economics, the framing effect refers to the observation that individuals will prefer a risky choice over a
safe one if the two options are presented in terms of loss rather than gain.

Act 2

If you are the decision-maker in a certain organization and have been tasked to formulate a mental
frame based on the existing problems, create your own model of mental frames in solving problems.
When you’re true, discuss it with your classmates.

a. Research and collect information

We can not correctly address what we do not understand, and we can not understand an issue if
we are not aware of its context, implications and possible consequences.
 b. Rephrase and Focus

First, rephrase. Then, Focus. Imagine that your problem has a timeline and project yourself in the time
before the problem appeared. Focusing on the future from this perspective will help you to determine
the longer-term effects of it.

c. Challenge Assumptions
When framing a problem, we need to ask ourselves what do we know to be true and what and
how much have we assumed to be true.
d. Broaden and narrow the view
By questioning the more significant reasons for doing something we may discover that the roots
of a problem are far beyond the level we were digging in. Narrow also your focus to make sure
that your-wide ranging problem is not finally responding to a very tiny and specific cause.
e. Change the perspective - Analyze it from the perspectives of all stakeholders involved. Gain
always some fresh insides to it before getting into finding the solution.

Act 3

Why do some planners make use of mental frames? What are the positive and negative consequences?

Optimistic frames produce positive sentiments, which lead to risk-taking and proactive conduct.
Unpleasant frames induce negative sentiments, which lead to risk aversion and reactive action. Time
pressure and stress magnify each other. Stress can also have a negative impact on our health, causing
insomnia, headaches, and stomach problems.

Chapter 5.1

Act 1

1. Can there be morality without God? What would that mean?

No. Before you can have any sort of absolute morality provided by god, you first need to establish
beyond doubt that there is, in fact, a god of some sort to begin with and then establish beyond doubt
what, exactly, that god wants us to do and not do. As long as there are thousands of different religions,
sects, denominations, etc., all claiming to know what god really wants and all disagreeing with each
other, any sort of absolute morality is completely impossible.

2. Do you think being gay us morally right?

The morality of homosexuality is not a philosophical issue per se, but one can use Objectivist principles
to evaluate the morality of homosexuality in any given situation. The essence of the Objectivist position
is this: Homosexuality can be a moral issue only to the extent that it is a matter of choice.

3. Is abortion morally, right?

abortion must be viewed as an immoral way of dealing with an unwanted pregnancy. This is
further evidence to show how abortion can be legal and yet immoral. In today's society the
frequent use of abortion is being seen as more and more common and a natural thing to do.
This is why a child who has been brought up in this kind of society and believes abortion to be a
 way of dealing with an unwanted pregnancy may commit herself to abortion thus being amoral.
She would not understand the reasons why abortion may be thought of as immoral.

Act 2

Kant’s pointed put that to be universally and absolutely good, something must be good in every instance
of its occurrence. Explain.

Kant says. No outcome, should we achieve it, can be unconditionally good. Fortune can be misused,
what we thought would induce benefit might actually bring harm, and happiness might be undeserved.
Hoping to achieve some particular end, no matter how beneficial it may seem, is not purely and
unconditionally good. It is not the effect or even the intended effect that bestows moral character on an
action. All intended effects “could be brought about through other causes and would not require the will
of a rational being, while the highest and unconditional good can be found only in such a will

Act 3

Explain the telos of Aristotle. What does it mean? Will there be legal sanction if one violates moral law?

Telos in Ancient Greek simply means “goal”, “purpose” or “end”. In Aristotle it has the special meaning
of “the state in which something’s nature is fulfilled”, or where something is fully “in act”, i.e. meaning
fully doing what it intends or is supposed to be doing. In Aristotle, “nature” (“physis”) is the inner
essence of something that makes it behave and be as it it does.

Sanctioning for not doing something is a bad idea but it has been popular in entire history because its
bad consequences happen later.

So if we can accept regulating behavior elsewhere, why don’t we do it about moral choices?

To be able to do that, you need to start with a vacant polity. That is, a country with a government but
without people. Then you allow only those who agree to act the way you want. It would be like a club:
Your place, your rules.

Chapter 5.2

Make a critique of Unitarianism. List down the advantages and disadvantages of Unitarianism on their
respective column below:

Advantages

1. We get to focus on happiness as a society. - When we look at societies around the world today,
it is clear that people are not experiencing this emotion. People tend to feel happier when they
have access to more financial resources.
2. 2. It teaches us that harming other people is wrong. - It shows us that harming others for the
sake of our personal benefit is not a helpful approach.
3. 3. Utilitarianism is an easy theory to implement. - There is only one process to focus upon when
implementing a society that functions from the foundation of utilitarianism: happiness.
 4. It is a secular system that focuses on humanity. - When we place the focus of each moral
decision based on happiness alone, then we eliminate the inconsistencies which occur when
focusing on a supernatural deity from an individual perspective.
5. Utilitarianism seeks to create the highest good. - When we are pursuing the ideas that bring a
maximum level of joy into our lives, then we are limiting the potential for harm to occur in our
families, communities, and overall culture.
6. It focuses on the democratic process for forward movement. - That means we are already using
the principles of this theory to create happiness in our lives. Now we just need to take the next
step forward to apply it outside of government.
7. We get to focus on an objective, universal solution. - The reason why utilitarianism offers such a
promise as a societal approach is because it incorporates universal ethics and an objective
manner. We can accurately measure the positive and negative consequences of each action we
decide to take as a group.

People tend to feel happier when they have access to more financial resources.

Disadvantagesil

1. We do not consider any other element besides happiness. - Utilitarianism only focuses on
majority happiness as a way to determine ethics and morality. It is essential that we remember
there are other items of value to consider when looking at the overall experience of what it
means to be human.
2. It creates an unrealistic perspective for society.
Imagine the scenario: there are eight people right now who would benefit from having your
organs. When looking at the principles of utilitarianism, the balance of happiness over harm
supports the idea of putting you to death to improve the satisfaction of everyone else.

3. Utilitarianism can be unpredictable.

When was the last time you were able to predict the future accurately? There are times when we can
take an educated guess as to what is going to happen, but it is very rare to receive a premonition about
a future event that actually comes true.

4. It also relies on people making consistent decisions.

If there is one thing that humans are good at doing, it is changing their mind. You cannot trust anyone to
ask for the greater good if the majority decides to get rid of all of the other structures which support
societal health and wellness.

Act2

Bentham views the law as not monolithic and immutable. What does it mean? When do we change the
law?

Bentham is a Utilitarian, thus, broadly speaking, judges the moral rightness or wrongness of an action by
the outcome. From that perspective “good” laws will produce the greatest good (variously defined) for
the greatest number of people. Since societies change, if the laws do not change with them, they may
cease producing that desired greatest good. A monolithic and immutable Law would not be able to
adapt, and, in fact we do change our laws as times change, thus Law cannot be considered as such.

Act 3

Utilitarians focus their attention on happiness or pleasure as the ultimate end of moral decisions. What
does it mean? Cite examples of pleasure that makes human happy.

Utilitarianism is the idea that the moral worth of an action is solely determined by its contribution to
overall utility in maximizing happiness or pleasure as summed among all people. It is, then, the total
utility of individuals which is important here, the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people.

For example, if you are choosing ice cream for yourself, the utilitarian view is that you should choose the
flavor that will give you the most pleasure. If you enjoy chocolate but hate vanilla, you should choose
chocolate for the pleasure it will bring and avoid vanilla because it will bring displeasure.

Chapter 6.1

Act1

The foundations of justice can be traced to the notions od social stability, interdependence and equal
dignity. Why? Support your answer.

the stability of a society—or any group, for that matter—depends upon the extent to which the
members of that society perceive that they are being treated justly and fairly. Otherwise, the
foundations have been laid for social unrest, disturbances, and strife. The members of a community,
depend on each other, and they will retain their social unity only to the extent that their institutions.
human beings are all equal in this respect: they all have the same dignity, and in virtue of this dignity
they deserve to be treated as equals. Whenever individuals are treated unequally on the basis of
characteristics that are arbitrary and irrelevant, their fundamental human dignity is disregarded.

Act 2

Identify the different kinds of justice and explain each. Cite examples

a. Distributive justice - Distributive justice, also known as economic justice, is about fairness in
what people receive, from goods to attention. If people do not think that they are getting their
fair share of something, they will seek first to gain what they believe they deserve. They may
well also seek other forms of justice.
b. Retributive justice - Punishment in practice is more about the satisfaction of victims and those
who care about them. This strays into the realm of revenge, which can be many times more
severe than reparation as the hurt party seeks to make the other person suffer in return. In such
cases 'justice' is typically defined emotionally rather that with intent for fairness or prevention.
c. Compensatory justice refers to the extent to which people are fairly compensated for their
injuries by those who have injured them; just compensation is proportional to the loss inflicted
on a person. This is precisely the kind of justice that is at stake in debates over damage to
workers' health in coal mines.

Act 3
When do we say that there is fairness in justice? Explain and cite examples. Is justice and fairness the
same?

Justice and what is seen as fairness, then, is a central part of ethics and should be given due
consideration in our moral lives. In evaluating any moral decision, we must ask whether our actions treat
all persons equally. If not, we must determine whether the difference in treatment is justified: are the
criteria we are using relevant to the given situation? Of course, justice is not the only principle to
consider in making ethical decisions. Sometimes principles of justice may need to be set aside in favour
of other kinds of moral claims such as rights or society’s welfare. Nevertheless, justice is an expression of
our mutual recognition of each other’s basic dignity, and an acknowledgement that if we are to live
together in an interdependent community we must treat each other as equals.

Chap 6.2

Compare and Contrast the following

a. Egalitarian
b. Socialist
c. Capitalist

Egalitarians live in a fantasy. Just look at the world around you. Equal outcomes isn’t designed into the
universe. Trying it never works. Socialists live in envy with a never-ending hunger for power. Don’t listen
to their words. Look at the millions that socialists killed in the 20th Century. Socialists deny basic human
nature, so they always fail, and always create great suffering along the way. Capitalists think people
should keep the fruit of their own labor, but capitalists are subject to maniacal greed and often ally with
socialists to crush competition.

Act 2

In your opinion, which of the three is the best? Why? Discuss this with your classmates.

socialism is directed towards a social-ethical end. Science, however, cannot create ends and, even less,
instill them in human beings; science, at most, can supply the means by which to attain certain ends. But
the ends themselves are conceived by personalities with lofty ethical ideals and—if these ends are not
stillborn, but vital and vigorous—are adopted and carried forward by those many human beings who,
half unconsciously, determine the slow evolution of society. For these reasons, we should be on our
guard not to overestimate science and scientific methods when it is a question of human problems; and
we should not assume that experts are the only ones who have a right to express themselves on
questions affecting the organization of society.

Act 3

What is laissez-faire? Cite examples of laissez-faire.

The definition of laissez faire is the theory that governments should have a very minimal regulation of
commerce or that people should be able to do what they want without interference.

An example of laissez faire are the economic policies held by capitalist countries.
An example of laissez faire is when a homeowner is allowed to plant whatever they want to grow in
their front yard without having to get permission from their city.

Chapter 6.3

Act 1

1. Explain the basis of the power of the state to impose taxes.

2. Why is it important for the citizens to pay tax?
3. How does taxation regulate the property of the citizens?
4. Are taxes paid by the Filipinos citizens commensurate to the services and programs they
received from their government? Defend your answer.

Act 2

Identify and explain the three basic principles of a sound tax system. Are these principles fair enough for
taxpayers?

Act 3

What is the difference between a progressive tax and a regressive tax? Tax avoidance and tax evasion?
Cite examples.