COURSE CODE

GE 10 ETHICS
Course Package

1st Semester
A.Y. 2022-2023

Prepared by/Compiled by:

KEN N FALCULAN, Ph. D.

http://linkedin.com/kenfalculan Email: [email protected]

http://researchgate.com./kenfalculan Mobile No. +639770649562
Web of Science Researcher ID ABG-8914-2021 +639634907748
Scope Database Author ID: 000000131530
Course Introduction
Ethics education is particularly important at the age of undergraduate students -
typically between 18 and 24 years of age - but also at more advanced ages. A
comprehensive study of education interventions designed to stimulate developments in
moral judgment. In many parts of the world, young people leave their parents' home in
order to enroll in university. Several years later, they graduate and take their place in
society. As the bridge between family and society, the university is the logical place for
developing, teaching and practicing ethics. By offering ethics education, universities
empower and equip students to make and carry out proper ethical choices later in their
professional life, ultimately benefitting the broader society.

The Modules offer a novel approach to global ethics education, based on innovative
teaching materials and methods that can help students develop critical thinking skills
and prepare them for value-driven and effective action. In addition, their emphasis on
integrity in addition to other ethical concepts, will add value to most exiting ethics
education program. The Modules seek to enhance students' ethical awareness and
commitment to acting with integrity and to equip them with the necessary skills to apply
and spread these norms in life, work and society. To increase their effectiveness,
ensure their relevance and generate interest, the Modules connect ethical theories to
practice and to everyday life. This practical orientation is intended to ensure that
students learn not merely what is the right thing to do, but also how to get the right thing
done. The Modules use innovative interactive teaching methods such as experiential
learning and group-based work. These methods keep students engaged, help them
develop critical thinking skills and ethical decision-making capabilities, and motivate
them to become committed to ongoing ethical improvement.

The Modules focus on core integrity and ethics topics such as universal values, ethics
and society, ethical leadership, diversity and pluralism, behavioral ethics, gender
dimensions of ethics, and how integrity and ethics relate to important fields such as
media, business, law, public service and the various professions. The Modules are
based on global data and are linked to global issues at the heart of the Sustainable
Development Goals. The Modules emphasize common universal values, while drawing
on approaches from around the world. Thus, they leave room for diverse perspectives
and lecturers can easily adapt them to different local and cultural contexts.

Learning Outcomes
All the Modules contain within recommends for active engagement in different forms.
Possible Class Structure will be engaging on sequence of activities:
1. Will be able to listen to a discussion accompanied by a slide presentation
2. Watch a short video presentation
3. Engage in a whole-class discussion on key questions
4. Working in small groups on a clearly defined task
5. Writing their own Declaration of Human Values
6. Create a performance which include poetry, music or dance
7. Perform and or present to their peers
8. Introduce an educational board game or app
Learning Objectives
This section particularly discusses the following five core learning objectives/principles that may
influence the mental and emotional and physical development.

1. The power of prior knowledge and experience:  An effective way to help students
learn something new is to test it against what they already know.
2. Varied and active engagement:  For students to gain a deep understanding of new
knowledge, skills, or values, they must actively engage with it.
3. The challenge of transfer:  Our best means of helping students to transfer
knowledge, from inside the classroom contexts in which they first encounter it to
 outside the classroom, is to connect that knowledge to contexts that students
encounter in their everyday lives.
4. The social nature of learning:  Although we often think about learning as a solitary
affair, the construction of new ideas and knowledge operates most effectively when
students combine solitary study with opportunities for discussion and collaboration
with one another.
5. Becoming self-aware:  The more self-aware students are about their learning, the
more they can monitor and improve their learning in any subject. As much as
possible, we should seek out opportunities to invite students to identify what they
understand or do not understand, or where they are strong and where they need
improvement

Lecture Notes
WORDS OF ENCOURAGEMENT:
“Knowing yourself is the beginning of all wisdom.” ...
“It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without
accepting it.” ...
“What is a friend? ...
“Educating the mind without educating the heart is no education at all.” ...
“Hope is a waking dream.”

MODULE 1
Integrity and Ethics: Introduction and Conceptual Framework

Introduction
This Module provides a brief introduction to the concepts of integrity and ethics. It
is designed to be used and wish to provide with conceptual clarity and expose to ethical
dilemmas and ethical decision-making. The concept of integrity has been added in order
to broaden the focus from the more traditional field of ethics. Combined, the concepts of
integrity and ethics provide a more comprehensive perspective – they allow us to move
beyond discussions about the difference between right and wrong, in order to focus on
relationships and behavior as well. Throughout the Module, you will be introduced to
concepts and thrown in at the deep end by being asked to make decisions on what you
would regard as the most ethical solutions to dilemmas. You will be guided through
three major ethical theories, and challenged to agree or disagree with them. You should
not be afraid to take a stance, as this will enhance their learning and enjoyment of the
Module.

Let’s bolt in:

Key issues:
The Module provides an overview of the concepts of integrity and ethics. Integrity
is a term that is used in many different contexts, for example by referring to information,
art or music. From a philosophical perspective discussion about integrity usually involve
an ethical or moral dimension, according to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

Ordinary discourse about integrity involves two fundamental intuitions: first, that
integrity is primarily a formal relation one has to oneself, or between parts or aspects of
one’s self; and second, that integrity is connected in an important way to acting morally,
in other words, there are some substantive or normative constraints on what it is to act
with integrity. (Cox, 2017)

Integrity is defined as “strict adherence to moral values and principles” by the

Chambers 21st-Century Dictionary (Chambers, 1999). The following discussion of
integrity mentions the origin of the word and different applications:

The concept of integrity has been derived from the Latin “integritas” (wholeness).
It is defined as consistency between beliefs, decisions and actions, and continued
adherence to values and principles. When someone is described as a person of
integrity, the suggestion is that such a person is not corruptible as a result of the
“wholeness” and “connectedness” of the values and principles that such a person
subscribes to. Integrity is often used in conjunction with ethics, suggesting that the
values and principles that are adhered to should be ethical values. Some of the values
that are often mentioned in this regard are honesty, openness, accountability and
trustworthiness. Organizational integrity refers to the ability of individual organizations to
develop and implement an integrity management framework, and for employees to act
in accordance with the values of the organization. (Visser, 2007 p. 278)

Different types of integrity have been identified; the Stanford Encyclopedia of

Philosophy includes the following:
• Self-integration refers to the ability of individuals to integrate various aspects of
their own personality into a harmonious whole.
• The identity view of integrity refers to the way in which individuals make
commitments about the things with which they deeply identify (in other words: acting in
a way that reflects their sense of who they are).
• The self-constitution view of integrity refers to actions that can be endorsed by
oneself at the time of acting as well as by a future self.
 • Integrity as “standing for something” brings a social dimension into the
definition: it entails making judgement calls but also requires respect for the judgements
of others.
• Integrity as moral purpose – this approach describes integrity in terms of a
commitment or a clear intent to live a moral life. It makes provision for others to
disagree with the views of an individual while acknowledging at the same time that she
or he is a person of integrity. (Cox, 2017)

Turning to the concept of ethics, Norman (1998, p. 1) has defined ethics as “the
attempt to arrive at an understanding of the nature of human values, of how we ought to
live, and of what constitutes right conduct.” The dictionary definition of ethics is “the
study or the science of morals” (Chambers, 1999). Morality is defined as “a sense of
right and wrong”, and being moral as “belonging or relating to the principles of good and
evil, or right and wrong” (Chambers, 1999).

While this Module focuses mostly on Western philosophical thought, it is

important to acknowledge the critical contribution of non-Western philosophy. For
example, the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy states the following about Chinese
ethical thought:

The tradition of Chinese ethical thought is centrally concerned with questions

about how one ought to live: what goes into a worthwhile life, how to weigh duties
toward family versus duties toward strangers, whether human nature is predisposed to
be morally good or bad, how one ought to relate to the non-human world, the extent to
which one ought to become involved in reforming the larger social and political
structures of one's society, and how one ought to conduct oneself when in a position of
influence or power. The personal, social, and political are often intertwined in Chinese
approaches to the subject. Anyone who wants to draw from the range of important
traditions of thought on this subject needs to look seriously at the Chinese tradition.
(Wong, 2017)
One of the most important figures in this tradition is Confucius. He lived
approximately between 551 and 479 BC and was a philosopher and founder of the Ru
School of Chinese thought. His teachings were preserved in the Lunyu or Analects. His
approach is summarized as follows by the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

Confucius believes that people live their lives within parameters firmly
established by Heaven—which, often, for him means both a purposeful Supreme Being
as well as ‘nature’ and its fixed cycles and patterns—he argues that men are
responsible for their actions and especially for their treatment of others. We can do little
or nothing to alter our fated span of existence but we determine what we accomplish
and what we are remembered for. (Riegel, 2013)

When we deal with difficult decisions we often feel that there is no clear answer
that is right, but we sense intuitively that the decision is about the distinction between
right and wrong. Discussions about integrity and ethics address the fundamental
distinction between right and wrong. This type of decision is much more difficult than
deciding whether we prefer one type of food to another, or whether the answer to a
simple mathematical equation is right or wrong.

Some people argue that we do not really have a choice whether we are ethical or
not – this is sometimes called “common morality”. According to Blackburn (2002, p. 4):
“Human beings are ethical animals. I do not mean that we naturally behave particularly
well, nor that we are endlessly telling each other what to do. But we grade and evaluate,
and compare and admire, and claim and justify. We do not just ‘prefer’ this or that, in
isolation. We prefer that our preferences are shared; we turn them into demands on
each other”. Sissela Bok (1978, p. 23) has argued that even liars share with those they
deceive the desire not to be deceived. Agreement with this statement indicates inherent
support for the concept of integrity. Within the context of an introductory module it would
be useful to look at a few interesting and challenging examples. Robinson and Garratt
(1997, p. 4) ask the following questions:

• Are there any differences between moral laws and society’s laws?
• What are human beings really like: selfish and greedy or generous and kind?
• Are some people “better” at morality than others?
• Why should I be a good person?
These questions will inevitably generate vigorous debate, and they also address some
of the fundamental philosophical and theoretical questions addressed in this Module.

The moment we – as human beings – express a desire about the way something should
be, we use ethical language. By suggesting that something should be different, we are
doing the grading, evaluating and comparison that Blackburn refers to. We suggest that
something could be better, and by implication we support the idea that some things are
better, more desirable or more acceptable than others.

The graph below explains the role of theory – it helps us to understand the world, but
theory by itself cannot change the world; we need action. Action – and hopefully ethical
action – will be informed by theory. Any theory that addresses the way things should be
or ought to be – as mentioned above – can be classified as an ethical theory.

The World

How do we understand it? How do we

change it?

Descriptive theory Ethical theory Action!

(the “is”) (the “ought”)

This Module will address three of the major Western ethical theories:
utilitarianism, deontology and virtue ethics. As was mentioned above, the critical
contribution of non-Western philosophy is acknowledged but not addressed in detail in
this Module.

Utilitarianism
The basic premise of utilitarianism is that an action is moral if it maximizes the
overall social ‘utility’ (or happiness). Two of the most important philosophers in this
tradition are Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. Utilitarianism, a form of
consequentialism, requires an individual to calculate the right response to an ethical
question by weighing up the positive and the negative consequences of an action.
Whatever produces the most happiness for the most people will be the most ethical
solution. It is important to note that the consequences should be measured in terms of
overall impact, not only in terms of the decision maker. All consequentialist theories hold
that morality depends on the consequence of actions. Utilitarianism, as a specific case
of consequentialism, holds that the rightness of an action depends on whether it
maximize a particular consequence, that is, the overall social utility.

The shipwreck example (see exercise 2) provides an easy way to demonstrate

this approach. Imagine that you are involved in a shipwreck situation – a ship has
started to sink in the middle of the ocean. Eleven people have jumped into a life-boat
that has been designed for a maximum of ten people, and the life-boat is also starting to
sink.

What should the passengers do? According to the utilitarian approach, the
answer is easy: ten lives saved will produce the most social utility, and therefore –
according to utilitarianism – killing one person is the ethical thing to do.
Deontology
The basic premise of deontology, in contrast to consequentialist theories like
utilitarianism, is that an action is moral if it conforms to certain principles or duties
(irrespective of the consequences). Deontology is derived from the Greek word deon,
which means duty. The one name that stands out from all others in terms of this
approach is that of Immanuel Kant. The following extract from the Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy provides a good summary of Kant’s position:

Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) argued that the supreme principle of morality is a

standard of rationality that he dubbed the “Categorical Imperative” (CI). Kant
characterized the CI as an objective, rationally necessary and unconditional principle
that we must always follow despite any natural desires or inclinations we may have to
the contrary. All specific moral requirements, according to Kant, are justified by this
principle, which means that all immoral actions are irrational because they violate the
CI. (Johnson, 2018)

In layperson’s terms, the Categorical Imperative can be compared and

contrasted with what is often described as the Golden Rule, one that can be found in
many different cultural and religious traditions: do unto others as you would want them
do unto you. It is immediately evident that this type of argument will provide solutions to
ethical problems that are different from a utilitarian approach. In the shipwreck example
it is no longer possible to justify killing someone, because the rule that can be deduced
as universal is: do not kill. Therefore, no matter what the consequences are, the morally
correct answer would be not to kill anybody on the life-boat.

Virtue ethics
The basic premise of virtue ethics is that morality depends on perfecting one’s
character. Different from utilitarianism (consequences) or deontology (duty), the
emphasis is on the virtues of the individual. Based on the ancient contribution of
Aristotle (384 to 322 BC), virtue ethics provides a more holistic approach to ethics.
Stewart highlights the following characteristics of virtue ethics:

• It is concerned with the person or agent behind the actions, rather than the
actions themselves.
• It considers aspects like emotions, attitudes, habits and lifestyle as morally
relevant – the way you are, rather than simply what you do, can be classified as good or
bad.
• It argues that life is too complex to be guided by strict rules that dictate how we
should act.
• It is holistic – it examines the purpose of life rather than individual moments.
• It promotes the virtues as being beneficial to the owner: “Being virtuous is good
because it’s good for you” (Stewart, 2009 p. 56).

According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, a virtue is “an excellent

trait of character. It is a disposition, well entrenched in its possessor - something that, as
we say, goes all the way down, unlike a habit such as being a tea-drinker - to notice,
expect, value, feel, desire, choose, act, and react in certain characteristic ways”
(Hursthouse, 2016). Another term that is important in virtue ethics is practical wisdom,
the ability to do the right thing no matter what the circumstance. Virtue ethics is very
attractive because it provides a holistic approach, but it has been criticized because of a
lack of practical guidance. As Stewart explains, “When I ask what I should do, virtue
ethics tell me I should be virtuous. This is no help unless I know what the virtues are
and which one to apply in my situation. How can I get help with this? I’m told that a
virtuous person would be able to advise me … But what if I don’t know any virtuous
people?” (2009, p. 69).
 In summary, all three major Western ethical theories have strengths and
shortcomings. There is no confirmed “best theory” and individuals will have preferences
and make their own choices. All theories can be considered together to aid make a
specific choice. Often instinctive choices are made without reference to an ethical
theory, although this could perhaps be best explained by virtue ethics. One risk is to
make a predetermined choice about a preferred action, and then to find an ethical
theory to justify a decision. Such an approach lacks consistency, and hence also lacks
integrity.

The exercises below will be used to guide through the steps required to identify
ethical problems and to apply ethical theories. Some of the concepts that will be
explored include justice, happiness, duty, rights, and the social contract. The distinction
between substantive ethics (what kinds of actions could be considered as good and
right?) and meta-ethics (what does it mean to say something is good or right?) could be
introduced. Finally, different applications of integrity and ethics will be addressed, which
will serve as an early introduction to other modules that form part of the Integrity and
Ethics.

Activities
The exercises in this section are most appropriate for classes of up to several
number of students, where students can be easily organized into small groups in which
they discuss cases or conduct activities before group representatives provide feedback
to the entire class. Although it is possible to have the same small group structure in
large classes comprising a few hundred students, it is more challenging and the
professor might wish to adapt facilitation techniques to ensure sufficient time for group
discussions as well as providing feedback to the entire class. The easiest way to deal
with the requirement for small group discussion in a large class is to ask students to
discuss the issues with the four or five students sitting close to them. Given time
limitations, not all groups will be able to provide feedback in each exercise. It is
recommended that the professor makes random selections and tries to ensure that all
groups get the opportunity to provide feedback at least once during the session. If time
permits, the lecturer could facilitate a discussion in plenary after each group has
provided feedback.

Assessment
Exercise 1: Personal values View the following video:
https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newTED_85.htm
Review the Mindtools website list of personal values: Think about the values and morals
that you live by. List your top ten personal ethical rules.

Exercise 2: Shipwreck situation

This is a classic case in ethics theory. Give the following information: Imagine that you
are involved in a shipwreck situation – a ship has started to sink in the middle of the
ocean. Eleven people have jumped into a life-boat that has been designed for a
maximum of ten people only, and the life-boat is also starting to sink. What should the
passengers do? Throw one person overboard and save ten lives? Or stick to the
principle of “do not kill”, which means that everybody will drown? You can invite
contributions from your classmates and even take a vote, and then illustrate how
different theoretical approaches (e.g. utilitarianism and deontology) will lead to different
solutions that are both valid in terms of the particular approach.

Exercise 3: Case study (Baby Theresa)

This full case is included in The Elements of Moral Philosophy (Rachels and Rachels,
2012). The following is a summary of the case:
Baby Theresa was born in Florida (United States of America) in 1992 with anencephaly,
one of the worst genetic disorders. Sometimes referred to as “babies without brains”,
infants with this disease are born without important parts of the brain and the top of the
skull is also missing. Most cases are detected during pregnancy and usually aborted.
About half of those not aborted are stillborn. In the United States, about 350 babies are
born alive each year and usually die within days. Baby Theresa was born alive. Her
parents decided to donate her organs for transplant. Her parents and her physicians
agreed that the organs should be removed while she was alive (thus causing her
inevitable death to take place sooner), but this was not allowed by Florida law. When
she died after nine days the organs had deteriorated too much and could not be used.

Disclose information and justification for your solution to the job below.
• How do we put a value on human life?
• What should one do when there is a conflict between the law and one’s own moral
position about an issue?
• If you were in a position to make the final decision in this case, what would it be
and why?

Exercise 4: Case study (emails exposed)

The case and questions, authored by Akshay Vyas, appear on the website of the
Markkula Center for Applied Ethics at the University of Santa Clara. They are available
from https://www.scu.edu/the-big-q/the-big-q-blog/emails-exposed.html .

Robert is on the baseball team at a small college in Texas. He’s a high-profile player on
the team, and as a result he has a lot of followers on Twitter and a large network on
Facebook. For this reason, the members of the athletic board at his college think it’s
necessary to monitor his social media accounts. In Texas, there is no law to prevent
schools from requiring individuals to give up their personal social media login and
password information, so Robert is forced to hand over his social media account
information.

University officials say that the intent of monitoring is to identify potential compliance
and behavioral issues early on, enabling athletic departments to educate athletes on
how to present themselves online. They regularly check what Robert posts and flag
certain postings with which they have issues. One day Robert tweets “Skipping class to
break bad, #schoolsucks, #bettercallsaul, #breakingbad.” Since Robert publicly admits
to skipping class, school officials flag the post and decide to also start monitoring
Robert’s email account without informing him.

Since the school provides an email account as a service to its students and faculty, it
reserves the right to search its own system’s stored data. According to the college’s
student handbook, administrators may access student email accounts in order to
safeguard the system or “to ensure compliance with other University rules.” The policy
does not mention whether or not account owners have to be notified that their emails
are searched.

When searching Robert’s email account, university officials find several questionable
emails between Robert and his tutor. It seems that Robert’s tutor has been sending him
all answers to homework assignments and quizzes. As a result of the investigation,
Robert is placed on athletic probation and his tutor is fired.

The following problems should be discussed:

• Should universities be allowed to monitor student email and social media accounts? If
so, under what circumstances?
• What crosses the line between campus safety and invasion of privacy?
• Are university rules regarding email and social media monitoring too vague? If so, how
can these rules be changed for more clarity?
• Should Robert have been punished for cheating in class if he did not know his email
was being monitored? What about his tutor?

Exercise 5: Case study (The Parable of the Sadhu)

The following summary is available from
https://hbr.org/1997/05/the-parable-of-the -sadhu:

In 1982, [Bowen McCoy] spent several months hiking through Nepal. Midway through
the difficult trek, as he and several others were preparing to attain the highest point of
their climb, they encountered the body of an Indian holy man, or sadhu. Wearing little
clothing and shivering in the bitter cold, he was barely alive. McCoy and the other
travelers – who included individuals from Japan, New Zealand, and Switzerland, as well
as local Nepali guides and porters – immediately wrapped him in warm clothing and
gave him food and drink. A few members of the group broke off to help move the sadhu
down toward a village two days’ journey away, but they soon left him in order to
continue their way up the slope. What happened to the sadhu? In his retrospective
commentary, McCoy notes that he never learned the answer to that question. Instead,
the sadhu’s story only raises more questions. On the Himalayan slope, a collection of
individuals was unprepared for a sudden dilemma. They all ‘did their bit,’ but the group
was not organized enough to take ultimate responsibility for a life. How, asks McCoy in
a broader context, do we prepare our organizations and institutions so they will respond
appropriately to ethical crises?

The full case study is available from https://hbsp.harvard.edu/product/97307-PDF ENG?

E=60513&R=97307-PDF-ENG&conversationId=806381

Elucidate the following questions.

• Can you identify the ethical issues in this case?
• If you were in the position of the travelers, how would you respond?
• What is the relevance of this case in contemporary society?

Assignment
The following post-class assignment to be completed within one week after the Module:

Select a media article that addresses an issue related to integrity and / or ethics.
Examples might include migration, inequality or privacy, or any topic that would be
deemed appropriate and relevant within the specific context. Describe the issue in your
own words and clearly demonstrate what the relevant integrity / ethical issues are.
Select an ethical theory (e.g. utilitarianism or deontology) and apply this theory to the
issue in order to identify a preferred way to guide decision-making. Maximum length:
1,500 words.

References

Blackburn, Simon (2002). Being Good. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bok, Sissela (1978). Lying: Moral Choice in Public and Private Life. Hassocks: The
Harverster Press Limited.

Cox, Damian and others (2017). Integrity. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Edward N. Zalta, ed. Available from

https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2017/entries/integrity/.

Chambers 21st Century Dictionary (1999). Edinburgh, Chambers

Hursthouse, Rosalind and Glen Pettigrove (2016). Virtue ethics. The Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Edward N. Zalta, ed.
Available from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/ethics-virtue/.

Johnson, Robert and Adam Cureton (2018). Kant's moral philosophy. The Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Edward N. Zalta, ed.
Available from
https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2018/entries/kant-moral/.

Norman, Richard (1998). The Moral Philosophers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Riegel, Jeffrey (2013). Confucius. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Edward

N. Zalta, ed. Available from
https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2013/entries/confucius/.

Robinson, Dave and Chris Garratt (1997). Ethics for Beginners. Cambridge: Icon
Books.

Stewart, Noel (2009). Ethics: An Introduction to Moral Philosophy. Cambridge: Polity

Press.

Visser, Wayne and others, eds. (2007). The A to Z of Corporate Social Responsibility.
Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Wong, David (2017). Chinese ethics. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Edward N. Zalta, ed. Available from

https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2017/entries/ethics-chinese .
 END OF MODULE 1

MODULE 2
Ethics and Universal Values
Introduction
This Module explores the existence of universal human values, which are those
things or behaviors that we believe should be privileged and promoted in the lives of all
human beings. A value is one of our most important and enduring beliefs, whether that
be about a thing or a behavior. Even though some values may be universal, they often
arise from particular religious, social and political contexts. To understand this, students
will examine one of the “universal values” within the United Nations system, i.e. human
rights. Students will be introduced to the formation of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights (UDHR) and understand how it originated from debates among a
multicultural group of individual philosophers, diplomats, and politicians. Students will
undertake an active learning exercise to create a Universal Declaration of Human
Values (UDHV) to reinforce these ideas.

Learning outcomes
• Understand the ideas of values, ethics, and morality in a multicultural context
• Understand how universal values can be uncovered by different means,
including scientific investigation, historical research, or public debate and deliberation
(what some philosophers call a dialectic method)
• Understand and discuss the idea of moral relativism and the challenges it poses
to universal values
• Critically assess the relationship between theory and practice in the formulation
of values
• Understand that values arise from lived experiences, but need to be justified to
others
• Understand the role of deliberation and debate in framing such values
• Understand how to create an actionable document through such a process

Key issues
This Module explores the existence of universal human values. Everyone has a
set of values that arise from their family, social, cultural, religious, and political contexts,
some of which correspond to more “global” and “universal” frameworks. The Module
encourages students to articulate their values and put them into conversation with
values from other contexts. The overarching goal is to demonstrate that it is possible to
articulate universal values and yet to recognize that such standards are always open to
contestation. One of the goals of this Module is to highlight this tension between the
universal nature of values, ethics and morality and the particular contexts that create
those values, ethics, and morals. Important themes to be addressed include ethics,
morality, values, relativism, rights, and responsibilities.

The term “value” means something that an individual or community believes has
a worth that merits it being pursued, promoted, or privileged. This can be a thing
(money, food, art), a state of mind (peace, security, certainty) or a behavior that results
from those things or states of mind (protecting innocents, telling the truth, being
creative).

A value is not the same as a desire. To desire something means wanting a thing
without much reflection on it; that is, a desire might come from an instinct, urge, or
physical need. A value may originate in a desire or a series of desires, but a value
arises after reflection on whether or not the thing I desire is good. Philosophers focus on
how we get from our desires to our values often by focusing on the word good. One
philosopher, G. E. Moore (1873-1958), argued that the word “good” cannot really be
defined because there is no standard against which we can discover what goodness
means. He called this inability to define evaluative terms “the naturalistic fallacy”
because it assumes that there is something in nature or in reality that evaluative terms
can match. He argued that good was a non-naturalistic quality, because it cannot be
verified by science (Baldwin, 2010).

G. E. Moore (1873-1958)
Every individual will value certain things, states of minds or behaviors as these
relate to his or her upbringing and social context. Every community will privilege certain
things, states and behaviors as a result of its geographical location, historical trajectory,
or ideational background. To claim that there are universal values, however, means
seeking to uncover something that applies across all persons and communities as a
result of their very humanity. Such universal values might be derived from scientific
investigation, social science testing, or philosophical reflection. They might also arise
from more nefarious methods, such as imperial practices, ideological and religious
proselytizing, or economic exploitation. To explore universal values, then, requires
attention not only to the values themselves but the ways in which they have appeared in
the current global order.

Values are the subject of ethical investigation. Sometimes the terms ethics,
morality and values are conflated into one subject. In English, it is common to use these
terms interchangeably, but philosophers distinguish them in the following way. Values
and morals are closely related, though morals and morality, according to most
philosophers, result from rationality, while values might arise from social contexts,
emotional dispositions, or rationality. As noted above, a value is different from a simple
desire, for the former is something that we want after some reflection upon whether it is
actually a good thing. Ethics, on the other hand, is the study of morals, including their
origins, their uses, their justifications, and their relationships.

There have been efforts to articulate universal human values. Professor Hans
Kung, a Catholic theologian who teaches at the University of Tubingen in Germany,
helped to create a Parliament of World Religions which issued a Declaration Toward a
Global Ethic. The Hindu spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravi Shankar also issued a Universal
Declaration of Human Values. Both of these documents emphasize values, and overlap
in many important ways. How can we find universal values? There are many ways to
investigate the existence of such values. Those approaches can perhaps be organized
into three broad categories: scientific, historical, and dialectic. These categories can be
represented by three different philosophers: Aristotle, Mencius, and Jürgen Habermas.

Hans Küng was a Swiss Catholic priest, theologian, and author. From 1995 he was
president of the Foundation for a Global Ethic (Stiftung Weltethos).

Ravi Shankar is an Indian yoga guru, a spiritual leader. He is frequently referred to as

Sri Sri, Guru ji, or Gurudev. From around the mid-1970s, he worked as an apprentice
under Mahesh Yogi, the founder of Transcendental Meditation.
Aristotle (384-322 B.C.) is considered one of the three great philosophers of
Ancient Greece. From Macedonia, he moved to Athens as a young man where he
became a student of Plato, another great philosopher (428-348 B.C.), who himself was
a student of Socrates (470-399 B.C.), perhaps the greatest Greek philosopher of
antiquity. Socrates did not write anything down, but interrogated the people of Athens
about what they valued. In those interrogations, he would often raise more questions
than answers, pointing out how established traditions do not really reflect what is good
for the human person.
 Plato, who wrote many dialogues using the person of Socrates as his main
character, argued that ethics and values should be understood through the idea of
virtues, or the standard of excellence within particular activities as a guide for how to
act. For example, being a good captain means ensuring that a ship does not crash, that
its goods and people arrive safely at port, and that a ship remains seaworthy. When it
comes to universal values, however, we are talking about what it means to be not just a
good pilot but a good human being.

Aristotle took Plato’s main idea about the virtues and tried to ground it in
empirical observations; hence, he took a scientific approach to finding out what is good
and what is a universal value. Aristotle did this by comparing people to other non-
human animals and comparing different political communities. So, for Aristotle, to
understand the virtue of the human person means looking for those activities which the
best people do and which make them happy.

He argued that there are two activities that differentiate human beings from all
other animals: humans think and humans live in political communities. We do know that
other animals have some ability for critical reflection, such as other primates and
dolphins. And, we know that some other animals live in what look like organized political
communities, such as primates, dolphins, and even ants. But no other animals use
language, giving humans the ability to reflect critically on what they are thinking and
doing. The Greek word logos means both language and reason, and it is that word that
provides Aristotle the key to finding the good and value for the human person. Humans
are defined by the combination of these two sets of activities. Aristotle concluded that
the best possible person is one who engages in two types of activity: critical reflection
and political activity. He called the first set of activities the intellectual virtues and the
second set of activities the practical virtues.

Aristotle believed that people need to be educated into the virtues. Individuals might
desire many things which they believe will make them happy, such as wealth, food,
drink, sex, or power. Each of these is important, according to Aristotle, but all of them,
on reflection, need to be enjoyed in moderation in order to become truly valued. Only by
using our rationality for thinking and creating a community in which thinking is
encouraged, and in which education is valued, can universal values flourish (Shields,
2016).

A second approach to discovering universal values is to focus on history and

tradition. The Chinese philosopher Mencius (372-289 B.C.) lived at roughly the same
time as Aristotle. Just as Aristotle was a student of Plato who studied under Socrates,
so Mencius was a disciple of the great Chinese philosopher, Confucius (551- 479
B.C.). Some believe that Mencius studied under the grandson of Confucius, though this
is disputed. Mencius is sometimes called the “second great Confucian scholar”, as he
developed and improved upon the ideas of Confucius in important ways.
Mencius (/ˈmɛnʃiəs/ MEN-shee-əs); born Mèng Kē (Chinese: 孟軻); or Mèngzǐ (Chines
孟 子 ; 372–289 BC) was a Chinese Confucian philosopher who has often been
described as the "second Sage", that is, after only Confucius himself. He is part of
Confucius' fourth generation of disciples.

Confucius, perhaps the most famous Chinese philosopher, argued for a moral
theory based on virtues. One virtue in particular was the most important; ren, or
benevolence to others. But this compassion was not directed at all people, but rather to
those with in certain social systems, beginning with the family. This means that being a
good person means understanding one’s place in society and understanding the
traditions and rules that arise from that place. A central principle of Confucius is respect
for one’s elders, a respect that would then radiate outward to respect for the leaders of
a society. These relationships are the focus of Confucian ethical and political thought.

Confucius was a Chinese philosopher and politician of the Spring and Autumn period
who is traditionally considered the paragon of Chinese sages. Confucius's teachings
and philosophy underpin East Asian culture and society, remaining influential across
China and East Asia to this day.

Like Aristotle’s Greece, the culture in which Mencius lived had well-developed
social, cultural and political structures. Ancient China was a flourishing political system,
though not without its problems. Indeed, Mencius lived during what is sometimes called
the “warring states” period in Chinese history when dynastic and political conflict was
rife. Like Aristotle, Mencius was born in one place (modern day Zhoucheng, a city in
eastern China) and moved about, serving for a time as a government official in Qi. In
this role, he advised the government on their invasion of another province, Yan, which
they undertook, though Mencius resigned from his role because the ruler would not
implement changes he advocated.

Mencius adapted the teachings of Confucius, proposing four virtues:

benevolence, righteousness, propriety, and wisdom. Together, these virtues expand
upon Confucius’ central one of benevolence, resulting in a fuller and more
comprehensive moral theory. But, like Confucius, Mencius believed that the family and
the society provide the basis for these virtues. To find these virtues, one needs to
understand one’s place in a society and one’s respect for tradition. Mencius argued that
benevolence was most important, but he also believed that cultivating wisdom to know
just how to orient that benevolence was important as well. Because of this, he placed a
great deal of emphasis on education, as did Aristotle (Van Norden, 2017).

There are some parallels with Aristotle in terms of what counts as values but also
some important differences. Both Aristotle and Mencius see critical reflection on human
life to be central; for Aristotle this translates into the intellectual virtues, and for Mencius
this translates into the virtue of wisdom. They differ, however, in how they see the
importance of politics. For Aristotle, the practical virtues mean cultivating a life in which
one can participate directly in politics; this perhaps arises from the fact that Aristotle
lived in Ancient Greece which was a democracy. Mencius does not place as much
emphasis on all humans being political actors, though he himself certainly participated
in politics. Rather, because of the social and political contexts of his world, Mencius, like
Confucius, placed more emphasis on respecting one’s elders and rulers and
recognizing one’s place in society and the family. Both, though, believed that the human
person flourishes when educated.

Comparing these two philosophers, we can see how we might come to the same
conclusions about universal values (the value of education and wisdom) and yet
disagree about others (the value of participating directly in politics or being ruled by wise
rulers). We can also see how the methods of the two philosophers differ in coming to
their conclusions; Aristotle sought to observe the natural world to come to his
conclusions while Mencius observed the social context to come to his conclusions.
There are other philosophers from different cultures who come to similar conclusions.
For instance, the Arab philosopher, al-Farabi (872-951) came to similar conclusions as
Aristotle concerning the relationship of the natural world to ethics.

Abu Nasr Al-Farabi known in the West as Alpharabius; was a renowned early Islamic
philosopher and jurist who wrote in the fields of political philosophy, metaphysics, ethics
and logic. He was also a scientist, cosmologist, mathematician and music theorist.

In today’s interconnected world, there is another way of seeking to find universal

values, which we might call the dialectic. This method involves engaging in debate and
dialogue with others who come from different perspectives in order to come to some
consensus about what we all agree upon. One modern day philosopher who advocates
for this approach is the German Jürgen Habermas (1929-). In his early life, Habermas
was a Marxist thinker, but he moved away from strict Marxism to embrace a more
nuanced critical theory. His association with a group of philosophers living in Frankfurt
led him to be associated with the Frankfurt School, which sought to combine critical
reflection on social and economic matters with an appreciation for democratic principles.
Jürgen Habermas is a German philosopher and sociologist in the tradition of critical
theory and pragmatism. His work addresses communicative rationality and the public
sphere.

Habermas proposed what he called “an ideal speech situation” as a way to

capture how ethical and political dialogue took place. This is an imagined approach to
dialoguing about complex issues in which all persons are equally able to discuss and
debate their positions. The goal of such a situation is to find some consensus by which
the community can advance its ideas and values. Habermas has written about how
modern democracies can capture this approach through combining the roles of
legislators and judges; the legislatures provide a space to debate making laws while
judiciaries provide a space for debate about legal disagreement. He has also argued
that the European Union provides an example of how an international order might be
designed that will lead states and their peoples to peacefully interact in order to
advance certain values.

This method differs from both the scientific and the historical. Rather than relying
on abstract scientific observation or respect for historical traditions, the dialectic
approach points to the creation of spaces in which dis-agreements and differing political
views can be aired in order to reach some consensus. Underlying it is the presumption
that universal values do exist, but that they can only come about through finding the
space to debate differences. Furthermore, there is the need to continually recreate
those spaces to ensure that future disagreements can be resolved (Bohman and Reig,
2017).

One example of how the consensus model might work can be found in the way in
which the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was created. Rights are not
the same as values, for they express a particular normative ideal that arose out of
liberalism. Underlying the UDHR, however, are important values, such as the values of
human security, free speech, and equality. These values could be expressed in
language other than rights, but they do represent something close to a body of universal
values.

More importantly, the process by which the UDHR came into existence mirrors
the consensus model described above. The UDHR was proclaimed by the United
Nations General Assembly in Paris on 10 December 1948. The idea for such a
document was proposed in the General Assembly in 1946. The United Nations
Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), one of the six main organs of the United
Nations established by the United Nations Charter in 1946, was tasked with developing
the document, and to do this it created a drafting committee chaired by Eleanor
Roosevelt. The drafting committee included individuals from around the world,
representing very different political, religious and ideological beliefs. The drafting efforts
were aided by an international commission organized by the United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), which published a book
compiling 20 essays on whether or not there existed any shared rights authored by
intellectual leaders from around the world. The book included contributions from some
of the most famous religious and philosophical figures of the day, including Mahatma
Gandhi. As one of the contributors, the French Catholic philosopher Jacques Maritain,
said about the deliberations of the Commission:
 It is related that at one of the meetings of a UNESCO National Commission
where Human Rights were being discussed, someone expressed astonishment that
certain champions of violently opposed ideologies had agreed on a list of those rights.
Yes, they said, we agree about the rights, but on condition that no one asks us why.
That “why” is where the argument begins. (Ackerly, 2017, p.135)

The UDHR is not a long document, with a preamble and 30 articles. The
Declaration is not legally binding, though it did inform the language of the two binding
covenants on human rights which came into existence in the 1960s and have been
signed by almost every country in the world. The Declaration focuses on rights but it
also emphasizes the importance of dignity and the value of the individual person.
Today, the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCR)
has made the promotion of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights a central
element of its work (see the video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=5RR4VXNX3jA).

Again, rights are not the same as values. But what this shows us is that it is
possible to find some consensus on broad human values, in this case expressed in
terms of rights.

This Module require students to consider the Universal Declaration of Human

Rights in relation to their own experiences, while also giving them the context of the
document, its applications today, and its relationship to wider issues concerning
universal values. The Module will also encourage students to critique the UDHR in the
way it gives rights greater importance than responsibilities, leaves out important
questions of sexuality and the environment, and may not reflect the lived experiences of
all people around the world. In addition, by focusing on the drafting of the UDHR, and
the role of individuals from around the world, students can identify, assess and put into
practice universal values that transcend their particular national, cultural, and religious
traditions.

The Module will enable students to see the relationship between universal
human values and concrete social and political realities. Debates about such values
often take place without considering how they apply in real life decision making. While
theoretical analysis and understanding is good as a starting point, it can prevent
students from appreciating how they can engage in practices that promote values.
Students will have a chance to understand how coming to agreement about values
requires engaging in deliberation and compromise, an activity that some would regard
as a fundamentally political exercise. There is a two-way street here, in which practice
informs values and values inform practices. Using the UDHR as a way to think about
this intersection of practice and value creation provides students with a more hands-on
understanding of universal values as the result of particular contexts.

Based on this theoretical discussion, students then undertake a simulation, this

one a more fictional one in which they are asked to create a Universal Declaration of
Human Values. In this simulation, they act as representatives of different traditions and
seek to create a document like the UDHR. In so doing, they should also think about how
values differ from rights (something discussed in the lecture and discussion prior to
this).

References
Ackerly, Brooke (2017). “Interpreting the political theory in the practice of human rights.”
Law and Philosophy vol. 36, No. 2.

Baldwin, Tom (2010). "George Edward Moore." The Stanford Encyclopedia of

Philosophy. Edward N. Zalta, ed. Available from
https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2010/entries/moore/.
Bohman, James and William Reig (2017). "Jürgen Habermas." The Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Edward N. Zalta, ed. Available from
https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2017/entries/habermas/.

Shields, Christopher (2016). "Aristotle." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Edward N. Zalta, ed. Available from
https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/aristotle/.

Van Norden, Bryan (2017). "Mencius." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Edward
N. Zalta, ed. Available from
https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2017/entries/mencius/

Exercises

All exercises in this section are appropriate only for you. However, as students’ prior
knowledge and exposure to these issues vary widely and decisions about
appropriateness of exercises should be based on your educational and social context.

Contrast and find points on the different given exercises below. All answer must
be compiled in rewritable cd.

Exercise 1: Performance: Enacting universal values

Search, read and deduce the speech by former United Nations Secretary General Kofi
Annan.

The speech was given at the University of Tubingen, Germany in honor of Professor
Hans Kung, the Catholic theologian who helped drafted the Declaration Toward a
Global Ethic (see section on Key Issues). United Nations Secretary General Annan
argues in this document that Kung’s ideas about universal values are captured in the
United Nations Charter, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and other United
Nations activities. He argues further that those values need to be defended by all
people and should not be a point of division between peoples.

Direction: Five values mentioned in the speech are: peace, freedom, social progress,
equal rights, and human dignity. Write a short performance in each stated five values.
Prepare a role play of the different values (should be recorded) it should be 2-3 minutes
long. The plays can be based on real life events or fictional scenarios.

Exercise 2: Simulation: Creating a Universal Declaration of Human Values

In this exercise, create a 10-15 article declaration based on Universal Declaration of

Human Values (UDHV). This is modelled on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
(UDHR), though its focus is on values rather than rights.

Everyone should read the UDHR along with selections from the edited volume from
UNESCO, “Human rights: comments and interpretations” (UNESCO/PHS/3) available
online at: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001550/155042eb.pdf.

Be reminded that you are doing something different from what the drafters of the UDHR
did, since they are focusing on values rather than rights. This might provide an
opportunity for you to discuss the differences between rights and values. The idea of the
exercise is to use the same format as the UDHR and try to create a document which
they can all agree to.

You have ample time to complete the assignment. You should find time in
answering the following questions:

1. What do you value?

2. How can what you value be turned into a rule of behavior?
3. What areas of life are most important to delimit in such a document, i.e., politics, law,
economics, society, family, etc.?

For more reading follow this link:

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (including the historical background on
This page). Available from
http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/index.html.

UNESCO. Human rights: comments and interpretations. Available from

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001550/155042eb.pdf.

o Mahatma Gandhi, “Letter to the Director General of UNESCO “, pp. 3-5

o Jacques Maritain, “Philosophic examination of human rights “, pp. 59-6
o Chung Sho-Lo, “Human rights in the Chinese tradition “, pp. 185-190
o Humayan Kabir, “The rights of Man and the Islamic tradition”, pp. 191-196

Brown, Gordon, ed. (2016). The Universal Declaration of Human Rights in the
21st Century. Open Book Publishers.

Annan, Kofi. Speech on Universal Values. Available from

https://www.un.org/press/en/2003/sgsm9076.doc.htm

Parliament of World Religions. Declaration toward a Global Ethic.

Available from https://parliamentofreligions.org/pwr_resources/_includes/FCKcontent/
File/TowardsAGlobalEthic.pdf

Student Assignment
This section provides a suggestion for a post-class assignment for the purpose of
assessing student understanding of the Module. Suggestions for pre-class or in-class
assignments are provided in the Exercises section.

Write a follow-up essay of approximately 1,000 words in answer to the following

question:

You have read Kofi Annan’s speech arguing that the United Nations system embodies
human rights. Is this true? Can the United Nations embody those rights? Does the
United Nations system provide the space in which we might work out these differences
and create universal values that can help us advance as a human species?

For further information on the given assessment follow this link:

Video material

Video from the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the
UDHR.
Available from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RR4VXNX3jA.

Gordon Brown’s TED Talk on global ethic versus national interest. Available
from https://www.ted.com/talks/gordon_brown_on_global_ethic_vs_national_interest.

END OF MODULE 2

Module 3
Ethics and Society

Introduction
This Module explores the importance of ethics to society and the relationship
between these two concepts. It is designed to be used by lecturers to help their
students understand the concept of society – sometimes defined as humankind as a
whole, sometimes in relation to a particular place – and to investigate the ways in which
ethical approaches can be applied to increase our understanding of society, and
ultimately our attempts to improve it. It also aims to illustrate that ethics is part of the
fabric of any dimension of society. Particular attention is given to social contract theory
and the work of John Rawls, with specific reference to the concepts of justice and
fairness. The Module is a resource for lecturers.

It provides an outline for a three-hour class but can be used for shorter or longer
sessions, or extended into a full-fledged course (see: Guidelines to develop a stand-
alone course).
Learning outcomes
• Define the concept of society.
• Understand the relationship between ethics and society.
• Describe different theoretical approaches that inform this issue, with specific
reference to social contract theory.
• Articulate and defend a preferred position on the relationship between ethics
and society while appreciating its limitations.

Key Issues
Does society need ethics? Can we envision a society without ethics? These
questions address the very important relationship between ethics and society, and are
informed by more fundamental questions such as the following:
• Is ethics inherent in human beings and therefore embedded within society
(which would imply that the laws of nature are universal and eternal, and can be
discovered by reason)?
• Is ethics a human construct and therefore dependent on its creators (and by
implication subject to both societal context and constant change)?
• Is the study of ethics and its role in society important for humans?

The concept of “society” is one of the most pervasive of all, and this Module
investigates different definitions of society. One of the many dictionary definitions of
society is that it is “a community, nation, or broad grouping of people having common
traditions, institutions, and collective activities and interests” (Merriam-Webster).
Although we sometimes refer to the global society, there are many different societies
that are defined in different ways (sometimes controversially) based on geographical,
cultural and other boundaries. One of the most popular ways to dissect society
conceptually is to make the distinction between three sectors: the public sector
(government), private sector (business enterprises) and civil society (non-profit
organizations). Although the concept of ethics can also be questioned, the point of
departure in this Module is to acknowledge and recap the main ethical theories without
asking the meta-question: Is there such a thing as ethics?

This Module focuses mostly on the concepts of society and ethics, but also
acknowledges the relevance of perspective philosophies. As opposed to the more
secular approach of Western philosophy, Hinduism, Buddhism, Confucianism and
Daoism offer alternative approaches to and explanations for the concept of society.
Although it is difficult to generalize, these approaches tend to be more closely
associated with religious traditions. Moreover, similarly to early Greek philosophy, they
often do not clearly distinguish between personal, social and political elements. The
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy describes the tradition of Chinese ethical thought
as follows:
[It] is centrally concerned with questions about how one ought to live: what goes
into a worthwhile life, how to weigh duties toward family versus duties toward strangers,
whether human nature is predisposed to be morally good or bad, how one ought to
relate to the non-human world, the extent to which one ought to become involved in
reforming the larger social and political structures of one's society, and how one ought
to conduct oneself when in a position of influence or power.(Wong, 2017)

As is often the case with a Western perspective, Greece is a good place to start
a discussion of the concept of society (Frisby and Sayer, 1986). The Greeks did not
have a separate word for society, but referred to society in combination with references
to community and association (koinonia). This word was used both within the political as
well as a household context and already contains an ethical dimension since a
relationship with the concept of justice is implied. Of course, the fact that only those who
were not slaves were deemed qualified to discuss these matters also illustrates some
interesting ethical dimensions about freedom which were not apparent at the time.
 Fast forward a few hundred years, and due mostly to the influence of Christianity,
the Greeks’ unified concept of society was discontinued. The work of Thomas Aquinas,
for example, makes a distinction between what belongs on earth (civitas terrena) and
what belongs with God (civitas Dei), with concomitant responsibilities to obey secular as
well as divine laws (Frisby and Sayer, 1986, p. 16).

All the main ethical theories can be applied to different action within or
dimensions of society. Some of the most popular and well-known normative theories are
utilitarianism, where ethical decisions are made based on an assessment of the likely
consequences of an action; deontology, where decisions are made based on rights and
duties; ethics of care, where morality depends on care for the wellbeing of others; and
virtue ethics, where the focus is not on assessing the action, but rather the individual
involved. These theories are discussed in further detail in Module 1 of the present
module series.

Within the secular tradition, the idea of a social contract is critical to

understanding the concept of society. In essence, a social contract comprises the
voluntary agreement of individuals for society to be regulated in a way that would
benefit both society and individuals, based on the ethical dimensions of justice and
fairness. The social contract has been defined as follows: “people live together in
society in accordance with an agreement that establishes moral and political rules of
behavior. Some people believe that if we live according to a social contract, we can live
morally by our own choice and not because a divine being requires it” (Ethics
Unwrapped, 2018).

A brief summary of the concept of the social contract is provided by the Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy: it traces the history of the term, starting with the Greek
philosophers to Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Kant and Rawls (D’Agostino, 2017). The
table below provides extracts from the Stanford Encyclopedia’s discussion of a few of
these philosophers.

Thomas Hobbes John Locke (1632–1704)

The 17th Century English philosopher John Locke (1632–1704) is among the
Thomas Hobbes is now widely regarded most influential political philosophers of
as one of a handful of truly great political the modern period. In the Two Treatises
philosophers, whose masterwork of Government, he defended the claim
Leviathan rivals in significance the that men are by nature free and equal
political writings of Plato, Aristotle, Locke, against claims that God had made all
Rousseau, Kant, and Rawls. Hobbes is people naturally subject to a monarch. He
famous for his early and elaborate argued that people have rights, such as
development of what has come to be the right to life, liberty, and property, that
known as “social contract theory”, the have a foundation independent of the
method of justifying political principles or laws of any particular society. Locke used
arrangements by appeal to the the claim that men are naturally free and
agreement that would be made among equal as part of the justification for
suitably situated rational, free, and equal understanding legitimate political
persons. He is infamous for having used government as the result of a social
the social contract method to arrive at the contract where people in the state of
astonishing conclusion that we ought to nature conditionally transfer some of their
submit to the authority of an absolute - rights to the government in order to better
undivided and unlimited - sovereign ensure the stable, comfortable enjoyment
power (Lloyd, 2014). of their lives, liberty, and property. Since
governments exist by the consent of the
people in order to protect the rights of the
people and promote the public good,
governments that fail to do so can be
 resisted and replaced with new
governments. Locke is thus also
important for his defense of the right of
revolution (Tuckness, 2016).
Jean-Jacques Rousseau Immanuel Kant (1724-1804)
Jean-Jacques Rousseau remains an Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) is the central
important figure in the history of figure in modern philosophy. He
philosophy, both because of his synthesized early modern rationalism and
contributions to political philosophy and empiricism, set the terms for much of
moral psychology and because of his nineteenth and twentieth century
influence on later thinkers. Rousseau’s philosophy, and continues to exercise a
own view of philosophy and philosophers significant influence today in
was firmly negative, seeing philosophers metaphysics, epistemology, ethics,
as the post-hoc rationalizers of self- political philosophy, aesthetics, and other
interest, as apologists for various forms of fields. The fundamental idea of Kant's
tyranny, and as playing a role in the “critical philosophy” - especially in his
alienation of the modern individual from three Critiques: The Critique of Pure
humanity’s natural impulse to Reason (1781, 1787), the Critique of
compassion. The concern that dominates Practical Reason (1788), and the Critique
Rousseau’s work is to find a way of of the Power of Judgment (1790) - is
preserving human freedom in a world human autonomy. He argues that the
where human beings are increasingly human understanding is the source of the
dependent on one another for the general laws of nature that structure all
satisfaction of their needs (Bertram, our experience; and that human reason
2017). gives itself the moral law, which is our
basis for belief in God, freedom, and
immortality (Rohlf, 2016).
https://www.unodc.org/e4j/integrity-ethics/teaching-guide/index.html
Table 1: Extracts from Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

John Rawls (1921 – 2002) was an American political philosopher whose most famous
contribution was his theory of justice as fairness (Wenar, 2017). The work of Rawls is
addressed in Exercise 3 of this Module. In the following quote he discusses one of the
most critical ethical characteristics of society – the tension between the common
interest and the individual’s interest:

Society … is typically marked by a conflict as well as by an identity of interest.

There is an identity of interest since social cooperation makes possible a better life for
all than any would have if each were to live solely by his own efforts. There is a conflict
of interests since persons are not indifferent as to how the greater benefits produced by
their collaboration are distributed, for in order to pursue their ends they each prefer a
larger to a lesser share. (Rawls, 1971, p. 4)

Of course, philosophy does not offer the only entry point for discussions about
society. In fact, an entire academic discipline – sociology – focuses on the scientific
study of structures, processes and relationships within society. Sociology can be linked
to the concepts of integrity and ethics in different ways. Even if the purpose of sociology
is defined narrowly as an “objective” study of aspects of society, many of those aspects
(e.g. class structure or societal deviance) have strong ethical dimensions. In addition,
the less neutral definition of sociology would imply a normative dimension, i.e. that the
purpose of sociology is to improve society through scientific study.

One of the most influential figures in the establishment of the sociological

tradition is Max Weber (1864 – 1920). Weber was a German sociologist and political
economist who wrote extensively about capitalism, and his work has often been
juxtaposed with the work of Karl Marx (Kim, 2017). The following view on capitalism
comes from his introduction to The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism:
 The impulse to acquisition, pursuit of gain, of money, of the greatest possible
amount of money, has in itself nothing to do with capitalism. This impulse exists and
has existed among waiters, physicians, coachmen, artists, prostitutes, dishonest
officials, soldiers, nobles, crusaders, gamblers, and beggars. One may say that it has
been common to all sorts and conditions of men at all times and in all countries of the
earth, wherever the objective possibility of it is or has been given. It should be taught in
the kindergarten of cultural history that this naïve idea of capitalism must be given up
once and for all. Unlimited greed for gain is not in the least identical with capitalism, and
is still less its spirit. Capitalism may even be identical with the restraint, or at least a
rational tempering, of this irrational impulse. But capitalism is identical with the pursuit
of profit, and forever renewed profit, by means of continuous, rational, capitalistic
enterprise. For it must be so: in a wholly capitalistic order of society, an individual
capitalistic enterprise which did not take advantage of its opportunities for profitmaking
would be doomed to extinction (Weber, 2001, pp. xxxi-xxxii).

Weber introduced the distinction between the ethics of conviction and the ethics
of responsibility in a famous lecture, Politics as a Vocation, which he delivered to radical
students in Germany in 1918. In the lecture, Weber describes two different world views.
The ethics of conviction presents the world of good intentions, sometimes exemplified
by people acting on the basis of religious beliefs. For example, a Christian does what is
right and leaves the outcomes to God. But the ethics of responsibility looks beyond
conviction and intention, and takes the consequences of action (or inaction) into
account. According to Weber, humans should resist evil with force, otherwise they will
be responsible for it is getting out of hand. Although Weber’s frame of reference was the
Christian tradition, it could be argued that the same tension between conviction and
responsibility would also apply in other religious traditions.

It is the second approach (ethics of responsibility) that implies ethical

responsibilities in terms of how we understand our position in society. Discussions
about ethics and society include many specialized applications of ethics: business
ethics and corporate responsibility, media ethics and medical ethics, to mention a few.
Questions about how to respond to fake news, social inequality, drone warfare, artificial
intelligence, political refugees, religious intolerance or climate change all have
substantial links to society. Fukuyama states that “a nation’s well-being, as well as its
ability to compete, is conditioned by a single, pervasive cultural characteristic: the level
of trust inherent in the society” (1996, p. 7).

References

Bertram, Christopher (2017). Jean Jacques Rousseau. The Stanford Encyclopedia

of Philosophy. Edward N. Zalta, ed.
Available from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2017/entries/rousseau/

D'Agostino, Fred and others (2017). Contemporary approaches to the Social

Contract. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Edward N. Zalta, ed.
Available from
https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/contractarianism-
contemporary

Ethics Unwrapped – McCombs School of Business (2018). Social contract theory.

Available from
http://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/glossary/social-contract-theory

Fieser, James (2017). Classical Eastern Philosophy. 1 September. Available from

https://www.utm.edu/staff/jfieser/class/110/4-eastern.htm
Frisby, David and Derek Sayer (1986). Society. Chichester: Ellis Horwood.

Fukuyama, Francis (1996). Trust: The Social Virtues and Creation of Prosperity.
New York: Free Press.

Kim, Sung Ho (2017). Max Weber. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Edward N. Zalta, ed.
Available from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/weber/

Lloyd, Sharon A. and Susanne Sreedhar (2014). Hobbes's moral and political
philosophy. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Edward N. Zalta, ed.
Available from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2014/entries/hobbes- moral/

Rawls, John (1971). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Rohlf, Michael (2016). Immanuel Kant. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Edward N. Zalta, ed.
Available from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2016/entries/kant/.

Society. Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster. Available from

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/society.

Tuckness, Alex (2016). Locke's political philosophy. The Stanford Encyclopedia of

Philosophy. Edward N. Zalta, ed.
Available from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2016/entries/locke-political/.

Weber, Max (2001). The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. London:
Routledge
Classics.

Wenar, Leif (2017). John Rawls. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Edward N.
Zalta, ed. Available from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2017/entries/rawls/.

Wong, David (2017). Chinese ethics. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Edward N. Zalta, ed. Available from
https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2017/entries/ethics-chinese/.

Exercises
This section contains suggestions for in-class and pre-class educational
exercises, while a post-class assignment for assessing student understanding of the
Module is suggested in a separate section.

The exercises in this section are most appropriate for classes of up to 50 or more
students, where students can be easily organized into small groups in which they
discuss cases or conduct activities before group representatives provide feedback to
the entire class. Although it is possible to have the same small group structure in large
classes comprising a few hundred students, it is more challenging and might wish to
adapt facilitation techniques to ensure sufficient time for group discussions as well as
providing feedback to the entire class. The easiest way to deal with the requirement for
small group discussion in a large class is by asking students to discuss the issues with
the four or five students sitting close to them. Given time limitations, not all groups will
be able to provide feedback in each exercise. It is recommended that the lecturer
makes random selections and tries to ensure that all groups get the opportunity to
provide feedback at least once during the session. If time permits, the lecturer could
facilitate a discussion in plenary after each group has provided feedback.
Assessment
Exercise 1: Today’s News
Students are encouraged to bring a daily newspaper to class or to access any
news-related web site or in television. Students are given five minutes for individual
preparation – the task is to explore the front page or headlines and to identify three to
five stories with a clear ethical component. After five minutes, individual/small groups
are formed (existing syndicate groups, if applicable) to discuss and share examples (10
minutes). Each group/individual is required to select one example to present or
presentation to the class as a whole (if applicable) (video recorded presentation for15
minutes).

Students Guidelines
• Have one example ready to illustrate what is required (articles about legislation
to protect consumers or the environment and measures to accommodate refugees or to
promote anti-corruption are a few examples that could be useful).
• Demonstrate clearly what the ethical component is in the example and look for
similar relationships when selecting examples to share with the class.
• When individual/groups present to the class, you should use a flip-chart or
board
to capture the main issues (during video presentation).

Exercise 2: The Everyday Ethicist

Watch the following talk: The Significance of Ethics and Ethics Education in Daily
Life.
This is a TEDx talk in which Michael Burroughs discusses different kinds of
ethical issues we face in our daily life. Because we all have to make ethical decisions on
a daily basis he describes the concept of “everyday ethicists”.

Student should discuss the video in particular the following questions: What is
the relationship between ethics and society? What is the origin of our own ethical
standards and the ethical standards of society? You should invite some students to
provide feedback (video presentation on feedbacking for 30 minutes).

Students Guidelines
• Have one example ready to illustrate what is required (for example, ask fellow
student or within the family whether they believe that they would have had the same
ethical standards if they had been born in a different part of the world).
• Refer to one or more of the ethical theories discussed in Module 1, and refer to
the material addressed in the Core Issues section of this Module.
• When you present to the class, you should use a flip-chart or board to capture
the main issues.

Exercise 3: Expedition to Mars1

This exercise comprises a simulation of John Rawls’ Veil of Ignorance thought
experiment. It includes the following components (the time allocation is a guideline only
and can be adapted according to the circumstances):
• Initial information provided to students via link.
• Individual discussion and come up with recommendations
(20 minutes)
• Presentations by small groups/individual student on recommendations (10
minutes)
• Students vote on best recommendation (5 minutes)
• Individual membership of roles revealed (5 minutes)
• Students meet in groups/classmates defined by roles (20 minutes)
• Presentations by five different roles (20 minutes)
Open this link for John Rawls’ Veil of Ignorance Theory
https://scholarship.richmond.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1137&context=philosophy-
faculty-publications

The student starts this session with the one or both of the following videos to set
the scene:
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMTLBhoCM8k. This clip provides an
animated overview of the technology that might enable the colonization of Mars, as well
as the typical activities that might characterize a Martian colony (if can be downloaded
examine and devise the given situation).
• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TnY23KEkZPY. This clip shows SpaceX
CEO Elon Musk unveiling his plan for colonizing Mars. It was delivered in 2016 at the
67th International Astronautical Congress in Guadalajara, Mexico. The purpose of using
the video is to show to students that this case study is no longer simply science fiction,
but could soon be a reality (if can be downloaded examine and have reflection and how
you will devise the situation).

Students will present with the following summary (or an alternative presentation)
of the concept of the Veil of Ignorance, accessible at
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/original-position/:

The original position is a central feature of John Rawls's social contract account of
justice, “justice as fairness,” set forth in A Theory of Justice ... It is designed to be a fair
and impartial point of view that is to be adopted in our reasoning about fundamental
principles of justice. In taking up this point of view, we are to imagine ourselves in the
position of free and equal persons who jointly agree upon and commit themselves to
principles of social and political justice. The main distinguishing feature of the original
position is “the veil of ignorance”: to insure impartiality of judgment, the parties are
deprived of all knowledge of their personal characteristics and social and historical
circumstances. They do know of certain fundamental interests they all have, plus
general facts about psychology, economics, biology, and other social and natural
sciences. The parties in the original position are presented with a list of the main
conceptions of justice drawn from the tradition of social and political philosophy, and are
assigned the task of choosing from among these alternatives the conception of justice
that best advances their interests in establishing conditions that enable them to
effectively pursue their final ends and fundamental interests. Rawls contends that the
most rational choice for the parties in the original position are two principles of justice:
The first guarantees the equal basic rights and liberties needed to secure the
fundamental interests of free and equal citizens and to pursue a wide range of
conceptions of the good. The second principle provides fair equality of educational and
employment opportunities enabling all to fairly compete for powers and positions of
office; and it secures for all a guaranteed minimum of all-purpose means (including
income and wealth) individuals need to pursue their interests and to maintain their self-
respect as free and equal persons.

Guidelines
Depending on the time available, decide to make two videos compulsory preparatory
work. Use the first part to give clear instructions, and – whenever you will be engaged in
discussion – move from one of your classmates to other group to answer any questions
they might have. The general flow of the session is as follows:

• The groups/classmates should come up with recommendations on the three issues:

order of the houses, size of the houses and salaries. Inevitably the discussions on
salaries will dominate. You should provide a spreadsheet template to facilitate
discussion, where different salaries can be tested – remember that the average has to
be Php.10,000 per person; therefore, differences between the roles will have an impact
in proportion to the size of the group. For example, it is much easier to accommodate a
very high salary for the scientists than it would be for the builders.

• Everyone should capture the feedback from the groups in a table in order to facilitate
the voting process. It is advised to vote on each aspect separately, e.g. one group can
receive the most votes for their view on the houses while another can win the salary
vote. The final “social contract” should be displayed to the class before the roles are
revealed.

• There are different ways in which the roles can be revealed, and this would depend on
the size of the class. An individual code can be added at the bottom of each copy.
Provide card for the encoding, then indicate the meaning of the code, e.g. 1 = builders,
2 = administrators, and so on. Alternatively, you will determine other ways to do the
allocation, e.g. if your birthday is in January you are a builder, or if your surname starts
with an A, B or C you are an administrator, and so on. The actual proportions of the
roles in class do not have to reflect the percentages as they are described in the
handout.

• When students meet in groups defined by roles, they should be instructed to discuss
the fairness of the allocation. For example, it is likely that the builders – when they meet
as a group – will not be satisfied with their salaries compared to some of the other roles.
All the groups (defined by role) should prepare a short presentation in which they
assess their own position and make some recommendations on changes. The idea is
not to enter into debate about actual changes to the original social contract, but simply
to experience the difference between discussing something when you do not know your
role, and then to discuss the same issues once you know what your role will be.

• The lecturer wraps up the session with a brief explanation of the original description by
Rawls, and then explains to students that they have just had a personal experience of
one of the most famous thought experiments in philosophy.

Exercise 4: What do I owe society?

Students are being informed that the university’s environment forms are a part of
society. The different sectors of society and the roles that they will play were discussed:
e.g. the public sector is involved through funding and regulation of university and degree
requirements, the private sector is involved through the production and sale of text
books and other support material or through the creation of infrastructure, and the
students themselves – especially once qualified and working in a professional
environment – will be in a position to contribute to society. Then it introduces the
question: What do I owe society? The question can be discussed in two distinct ways:
• Given the investment that society has made to educate me, how should I
behave while I am a student? Is it acceptable to get involved in activities such as buying
or selling exam papers or written assignments, or plagiarism?
• What do I owe society once I graduate? Should I consider societal needs when
I decide on where I want to work?

Guidelines
• Depending on the time available, you will discuss in small groups first, or simply
solicit individual responses from the floor.
• Be prepared to let engage in debate. While there may be broad consensus on
undesirable behavior such as plagiarism, the degree to which societal needs should
influence career choices will be controversial.

Possible class structure

This section contains recommendations for a sequence and timing intended to achieve
learning outcomes.
Society and ethics (35 minutes)

The students engage in Exercise 1: you are given five minutes for individual preparation
– the task is to explore the front page of a newspaper or online headlines of a news site
and to identify three to five stories with a clear ethical component. After five minutes you
need to discuss and state examples (10 minutes). Everyone is required to select one
example to present to the class/video presentation as a whole (15 minutes).

Presentation on the importance of ethics to society (30 minutes) •

Each one will be presenting the definition of society as well as the main ethical theories.
• Depending on whether you have completed Module 1, this session could be
shortened. • Exercise 2 is completed: Look for a co- pair and form in groups of two and
three to discuss the video and in particular the following questions: What is the
relationship between ethics and society? What is the origin of our own ethical standards
and the ethical standards of society?

Core reading
This section provides a list of (mostly) open access materials that the lecturer could ask
the students to read before taking a class based on this Module.

The Significance of Ethics and Ethics Education in Daily Life

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8juebyo Z4 »This is a TEDx talk in which Dr
Michael Burroughs discusses different kinds of ethical issues we face in our daily life.
Because we all have to make ethical decisions on a daily basis he describes the
concept of “everyday ethicists”.

Contemporary Approaches to the Social Contract https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/

contractarianism-contemporary/ » In this discussion by the Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy, the following components of the social contract concept
are discussed: the role of the social contract, the parties that are involved, agreement
between parties, the object of agreement and the content of the agreement.

Civil Society, United Nations http://www.un.org/en/sections/resources-different

audiences/civil-society/index.html » A brief discussion of the concept of civil
society, and how this sector is served by the United Nations.

Student assessment:
This section provides a suggestion for a post-class assignment for the purpose of
assessing student understanding of the Module.

Select any media article that addresses the relationship between ethics and society.
Examples might include fake news, social inequality, drone warfare, artificial
intelligence, refugees, religious intolerance, climate change, or any topic that would be
deemed appropriate and relevant within the specific context. Describe the example in
your own words and clearly demonstrate what the relevant issues are. Select an ethical
theory (e.g. utilitarianism or deontology) and apply this theory to the issue in order to
identify a preferred way to guide decision making and possibly regulation. Maximum
length: 1,500 words.

Video material
• The Significance of Ethics and Ethics Education in Daily Life.
• The McCoy Family Center for Ethics in Society at Stanford University.

Self- assessment
Direction: Discuss briefly what is being ask on the problem. Limit your discussion in 250
words.
 Topic Brief description
Is there such a thing as society?
Am I free?
Is there such a thing as ethics?
Natural law
Ethics theory
Nasty, brutish and short
The Social Contract
Trust
Why be good?

END OF MODULE 3

MODULE 4
Ethical Leadership

Introduction

We live in a world in which individuals, organizations, countries and societies are

increasingly connected. Therefore, the impact of leadership – both good and bad
reverberates throughout entire political and economic systems. Greater connection
equals greater influence, and this has changed the nature of leadership. Leaders have
influence beyond their organizations, increasing the interconnection between ethics and
good leadership. This Module is designed to help acquaint students with the theoretical
underpinnings and practical applications of ethical leadership, considering the cultural
diversity of contemporary organizations.
The Module is structured around three major questions:
● What is ethical leadership?
● Why is ethical leadership important?
● How can ethical leadership be promoted?

Learning outcomes
● Define and give examples of ethical leadership
● Understand leaders’ ethical responsibilities
● Explain effective ethical leadership
● Assess ethical leadership
● Identify ways to promote ethical leadership.

Key issues

This Module is designed to help acquaint students with the theoretical underpinnings
and practical applications of ethical leadership, considering the cultural diversity of
contemporary organizations. The Module is structured around three major questions:
● What is ethical leadership?
● Why is ethical leadership important?
● How can ethical leadership be promoted?

It is noted that leadership is sometimes exercised collectively, for example, through an

organization. However, this focuses on individual leadership. These applies to both
formal and informal leadership.

Leadership and ethics

Leadership has been defined in various ways (Fleishman and others, 1991). One
common definition regards leadership as a process whereby an individual influence a
group of individuals to achieve a common goal (Northouse, 2016, p. 16). The following
components are central to this definition: (a) leadership is a process, (b) leadership
involves influence, (c) leadership occurs in groups, and (d) leadership involves common
goals.

For present purposes, these refers to the individuals exerting influence as ‘leaders’, and
to those being influenced as ‘followers. While the distinction between leaders and
followers is helpful for illustrative purposes, it should be noted that one can
simultaneously be a leader in one context and a follower in another context. It should
also be noted that leadership can be formal, such as in the case of an elected prime
minister or a company’s CEO. But there are also cases of informal leadership, when the
influence does not derive from a formal authority conferred through rules and
procedures. Finally, it is useful to highlight that leaders can be associated with the world
of business, politics, popular culture, and other areas of life.
Turning to the concept of ethical leadership, Eisenbeiss (2012) argues that this concept
involves setting and pursuing ethical goals and influencing others in an ethical manner.
Similarly, De Hoogh and Den Hartog (2009) define ethical leadership as the process of
influencing the activities of a group toward goal achievement in a socially responsible
way. They focus both on the means through which leaders attempt to achieve goals as
well as on the ends themselves.

As discussed in detail in Integrity and Ethics Module 1 (Introduction and Conceptual

Framework), the study of ethics generally consists of examining questions about right
and wrong, virtue, duty, justice, fairness, and responsibility towards others. From an
ethical perspective, according to Ciulla (2014), the ultimate point of studying leadership
is to answer the question: What is good leadership? The word “good” has two meanings
in this context: technically good (or effective) and morally good. This focus on the
concept of ‘morally good’ demonstrates that ethics lies at the heart of leadership
studies.

The importance of ethical leadership

Ethical leadership is important for two main reasons. First, leaders have ethical
responsibilities because they have a special position in which they have a greater
opportunity to influence others and, therefore, outcomes in significant ways. Most
people would agree that all of us have a responsibility to behave ethically, but it is clear
that leaders are held to higher ethical standards than followers.

The values of leaders influence the culture of an organization or society, and whether it
behaves ethically or not. Leaders set the tone, develop the vision, and their values and
behaviors shape the behavior those involved in the organization or society. Therefore,
leaders have a significant impact on people and societies. Examples of formal and
informal leaders from around the world include Nelson Mandela, Mahatma Gandhi,
Malala Yousafzai, Peng Liyuan (First Lady of China), Sheikh Hasina Wajed (Prime
Minister of Bangladesh), Yvon Chouinard (the founder of Patagonia), Melinda Gates
and Angelina Jolie. However, the impact of a leader is not always positive, as illustrated
by Hitler’s leadership of Nazi Germany. The impact of his leadership was disastrous for
millions of individuals and the world in general.

On a smaller scale, even team leaders can have profound effects on their team
members and the organization. All leaders, no matter how many followers they have,
exert power. To exert power over other people carries an ethical responsibility. Power is
the ability of one person (or department) in an organization to influence other people to
bring about desired outcomes. The greater the power, the more responsibility a leader
has. Therefore, leaders at all levels carry a responsibility for setting the ethical tone and
for acting as role models for others.

Contemporary practice and literature is shifting the focus away from traditional
leadership styles, such as charismatic and transactional leadership, and is increasingly
focusing on leadership styles that emphasize an ethical dimension, such as
transformative, servant, value-based or authentic leadership. In other words, what is
regarded today as a ‘good leader’ is someone who effectively leads towards ethical
results and not someone who is simply good at leading (as many ill meaning
demagogues can be). It has been argued that this development emphasizes the strong
links between ethics and effective leadership (Ng and Feldman, 2015).

Two models can be used to explain the relationship between ethical leadership and
effective leadership – the ‘interpersonal trust’ model and the ‘social power’ model. The
former is attributed to Schindler and Thomas (1993), who argue that interpersonal trust
is based on five components: integrity, competence, consistency, loyalty, and
openness. Integrity refers to honesty and truthfulness; competence is associated with
technical and interpersonal knowledge and skills; consistency is defined as reliability,
predictability, and good judgment; loyalty refers to willingness to protect and save face
for a person; and openness is the willingness to share ideas and information freely. This
model reflects the idea that followers who trust a leader are willing to be vulnerable to
the leader’s actions because they are confident that their rights and interests will not be
abused.

The ‘social power’ model was developed by French and Raven (1959), who identified
five common and important bases of power: legitimate, coercive, reward, expert, and
referent. Legitimate power refers to a person’s right to influence another person coupled
with the latter’s obligation to accept this influence; coercive power derives from having
the capacity to penalize or punish others; reward power is about having the capacity to
provide rewards to others; expert power is based on the followers’ perceptions of the
leader’s competence; and referent power derives from the followers’ identification with
and liking of the leader. Each of these bases of power increases a leader’s capacity to
influence the attitudes, values, or behaviors of others.

There are three ways in which a follower may react to these forms of power, according
to French and Raven (1959). First, when leaders successfully use legitimate or coercive
or reward power (collectively referred to as position power) they will generate
compliance. Compliance means that people follow the directions of the person with
power, whether or not they agree with those directions. The second way in which
followers may react to the use of power, especially the use of coercion that exceeds a
level people consider legitimate, is to resist the leader’s attempt to influence. Resistance
means that employees will deliberately try to avoid carrying out instructions or they will
attempt to disobey orders. The third type of reaction to power is commitment, which is
the response most often generated by expert or referent power (collectively referred to
as personal power). Commitment means that followers adopt the leader’s viewpoint and
enthusiastically carry out instructions. Although compliance alone may be enough for
routine matters, commitment is particularly important when the leader is promoting
change (Daft, 2008). In general, people tend to identify with an ethical leader. Ethical
leadership is not the sole source of referent power, but it is an important one,
particularly in an increasingly changing, globalizing, and transparent world.

Ethical dimensions of leadership

The evaluation of leadership from an ethical point of view is influenced by ethical
theories and principles of ethical leadership, as well as by practical questions. Ethical
theories provide a system of rules or principles that guide us in making decisions about
what is right or wrong and good or bad in a particular situation (Northouse 2016). There
are various theoretical approaches to ethical decision-making. Three of the major
Western theories were discussed in Module 1: utilitarianism (morality depends on
whether the action maximizes the overall social ‘utility’ or happiness), deontology
(morality depends on conformity to moral principles or duties irrespective of the
consequences) and virtue ethics (morality depends on perfecting one’s character).
Practical guidelines for exercising ethical leadership have been created by various
scholars. For example, Eisenbeiss (2012) highlights four principles of ethical leadership:
humane orientation, justice orientation, responsibility and sustainability orientation, and
moderation orientation. Another approach is that of Northouse (2016), who suggests
five principles of ethical leadership: respect, service, justice, honesty, and community.
These principles are the focus of Exercise 5 of the Module.

While theories and principles of ethical leadership are pertinent, practical questions are
also important for ethical dilemmas, especially since it is not always feasible to apply a
detailed theoretical analysis before deciding. In this regard, it is helpful to use a
checklist to guide decision-making. This is sometimes referred to as “ethics quick tests”
or ethical decision-making models, both of which have made their appearance in
various guises such as codes of conduct of large corporations. The following example of
an ethical decision-making model is provided by Hodges and Steinholtz (2018):
Another example is the ethics quick test that is provided by The Ethics Center, an
Australian-based non-profit organization. The Ethics Center suggests that we ask the
following six questions before we decide:

1. Would I be happy for this decision to be headlining the news tomorrow?

2. Is there a universal rule that applies here?
3. Will the proposed course of action bring about a good result?
4. What would happen if everybody did this?
5. What will this proposed action do to my character or the character of my
organization?
6. Is the proposed course of action consistent with my values and principles?

Effective leaders are often confronted with impossible dilemmas, where no ideal
resolution exists. In such situation leaders need to make difficult decisions that involve
sacrificing some goods for the sake of promoting others. A classic example is the
decision to go to war, knowing that many people, including civilians, will die. Sometimes
this dilemma is known as the dirty hands problem.

Becoming an ethical leader

The issue of ethical leadership is an ancient one. For example, Aristotle argued that the
ethical person in a position of leadership embodies the virtues of courage, temperance,
generosity, self-control, honesty, sociability, modesty, fairness, and justice. To
Confucius, wisdom, benevolence and courage are the core virtues. Applying ethics to
leadership and management, Velasquez (1992) has suggested that managers develop
virtues such as perseverance, public-spiritedness, integrity, truthfulness, fidelity,
benevolence, and humility. Ethical leadership is also associated with the African
concept of the sage. Henry Odera Oruka (1944-1995), from Kenya, researched sage
traditions of Sub-Saharan Africa and provided an account of wisdom that is distinctly
African. The contemporary South African author Reul Khoza provided accounts of
ethical leadership from the perspective of Ubuntu which, among other things, feature a
communitarian account of virtue originating in Africa. The philosopher Al-Farabi (872-
950) provides us insights into ethical leadership from an Islamic perspective. He was
born somewhere in modern day Central Asia, and moved throughout the great cities of
the Islamic world, such as Baghdad and
Damascus. His philosophy was wide ranging, but his insights on leadership can be
found in his writings on ethics and politics. In those works, including his famous book
The Virtuous City, Al-Farabi argued that leaders should also be philosophers, an idea
he drew from the Ancient Greek philosopher Plato. For Al-Farabi, this meant that a
leader must not just be a person of action and power, but one who reflects upon what is
best for the community which he or she governs. Unlike Plato, he argued that the best
city was not a monocultural one, but one which embraced diversity, and the wisest
leaders found ways in which peoples of different races and beliefs could live together.
Other thinkers have emphasized other sets of virtues, but the differences are not as big
as one might think. In fact, people from various cultures may have quite similar views on
essential virtues.

Regarding the development of virtues, according to the Aristotelian way, when virtues
are practiced over time, from youth to adulthood, good values become habitual, and
part of the people themselves. By telling the truth, people become truthful; by giving to
the poor, people become benevolent; by being fair to others, people become just. The
Confucian way of cultivating oneself begins with obtaining a deep knowledge of how the
world works, moves through taking certain actions and ends with one’s most ambitious
goal – to illustrate virtue throughout the world. This is strongly connected to the idea that
‘knowing’, ‘doing’ and ‘being’ are three interrelated components of an ethical person. In
The Great Learning, written around 500 B.C., and the first of four books selected by Zhu
Xi during the Song Dynasty as a foundational introduction to Confucianism, Confucius
described the process as follows:

The ancients who wished to illustrate illustrious virtue throughout the kingdom first
ordered well their own states. Wishing to order well their states, they first regulated their
families. Wishing to regulate their families, they first cultivated their persons. Wishing to
cultivate their persons, they first rectified their hearts. Wishing to rectify their hearts,
they first sought to be sincere in their thoughts. Wishing to be sincere in their thoughts,
they first extended to the utmost their knowledge. Such extension of knowledge lay in
the investigation of things. (http://classics.mit.edu/Confucius/learning.html)

Treviño, Hartman and Brown (2000) argue that ethical leadership comprises two
aspects: the “ethical person” and the “ethical manager”. One must first be an ethical
person in order to become an ethical manager. The managerial aspect refers to a
leader's intentional efforts to influence others and guide the ethical behavior of followers
– such as communicating ethical standards and disciplining employees who behave
unethically. Ethical leadership relies on a leader’s ability to focus the organization's
attention on ethics and values and to infuse the organization with principles that will
guide the actions of all employees. Treviño and others also identify three measures that
effective ethical managers usually take. First, they serve as a role model for ethical
conduct in a way that is visible to employees. Second, they communicate regularly and
persuasively with employees about ethical standards, principles and values. Third, they
use the reward system consistently to hold all employees accountable to ethical
standards. The context in which leaders operate should not be ignored. Even an ethical
person with ethical intentions can behave unethically due to behavioral dimensions and
or systemic pressures. These issues are explored in depth in Modules 6, 7 and 8.
Moreover, ethical leadership may vary in different cultures, including in terms of style
and values as well as the manners in which the leader influences followers.

References

Ciulla, Joanne B. (2014). Ethics, the Heart of Leadership. 3rd ed. Santa Barbara,
California: Praeger.

Daft, Richard L. (2008). The Leadership Experience. 4th ed. Stamford, CT: Cengage.
de Hoogh, Annebel H.D., and Deanne N. den Hartog (2009). Ethical leadership: the
positive and responsible use of power. In Power and Interdependence in
Organizations, Dean Tjosvold and Barbara Wisse, eds. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Eisenbeiss, Silke Astrid (2012). Re-thinking ethical leadership: an interdisciplinary

integrative approach. The Leadership Quarterly, vol. 23, No. 5, pp. 791–808.

Fleishman, Edwin A. and others (1991). Taxonomic efforts in the description of leader
behavior: a synthesis and functional interpretation. The Leadership Quarterly,
vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 245–287.

French, John R. P., Jr. and Bertram Raven (1959). The bases of social power. In
Studies
in social power, ed. Dorwin Cartwright. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social
Research.

Hodges, Christopher and Ruth Steinholtz (2018). Ethical Business Practice and
Regulation: A Behavioral and Values-Based Approach to Compliance and
Enforcement. Oxford: Hart Publishing.

Ng, Thomas W. H., and Daniel C. Feldman (2015). Ethical leadership: meta-analytic
evidence of criterion-related and incremental validity. Journal of Applied
Psychology, vol. 100, No. 3, pp. 948-965.

Northouse, Peter G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice. 7th ed. Los Angeles:
SAGE.

Schindler, Paul L., and Cher C. Thomas (1993). The structure of interpersonal trust
in the workplace. Psychological Reports, vol. 73, No. 2, pp. 563-573.

Treviño, Linda Klebe, Laura Pincus Hartman and Michael E. Brown (2000). Moral
person and moral manager: how executives develop a reputation for ethical
leadership. California Management Review, vol. 42, No. 4, pp. 128–142.

Velasquez, Manuel G. (1992). Business Ethics: Concepts and Cases. 3 rd. ed.
Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Exercises

This section contains suggestions for in-class and pre-class educational exercises,
while a post-class assignment for assessing student understanding of the Module is
suggested in a separate section.

The exercises in this section are most appropriate for classes of numerous students,
where students can be easily organized into small groups in which they discuss cases
or conduct activities before group representatives provide feedback to the entire class.

Although it is possible to have the same small group structure in large classes
comprising a few hundred students, it is more challenging and the learners might wish
to adapt facilitation techniques to ensure sufficient time for group discussions as well as
providing feedback to the entire class. The easiest way to deal with the requirement for
small group discussion in a large class is to ask students to discuss the issues with the
four or five students sitting close to them.
Given time limitations, not all groups will be able to provide feedback in each exercise. It
is recommended that the learners make random selections and tries to ensure that all
groups get the opportunity to provide feedback at least once during the session. If time
permits, the students could facilitate a discussion in plenary after each group has
provided feedback.

All exercises in this section are appropriate for undergraduate students. However, as
students’ prior knowledge and exposure to these issues vary widely, decisions about
appropriateness of exercises should be based on their educational and social context.

Exercise 1: Leader’s view

Leaders differ in how they view human nature and the tactics they use to get things
done through others. This exercise is intended to encourage students to reflect carefully
on their current views on leadership and to stimulate their interest in learning more
about ethical leadership. You are being asked to complete the following questionnaire,
either in class or presentation, and facilitates a discussion around the questions. The
questionnaire is adapted from Richard Daft’s The Leadership Experience (see
References in Key issues section of the Module).

• Think carefully about each item below and indicate whether you agree or disagree with
it. Also indicate whether you think your class mates would agree or disagree with each
item. (Justify your answer in 250 words).
Me (Agree / My class
Disagree) mates (Agree
/Disagree)
1. Overall, it is better to be humble and honest than to
be successful and dishonest.
2. If you trust someone completely, you are asking for
trouble
3. A leader should act only when it is morally right.
4. A good way to handle people is to tell them what
they like to hear.
5. There is no excuse for telling a white lie to someone.
6. It makes sense to flatter important people.
7. Most people who get ahead as leaders have led
very moral lives.
8. It is better not to tell people the real reason you did
something unless it benefits you to do so.
9. The majority of people are brave, good, and kind.
10. It is hard to get to the top without sometimes
cutting corners.

Exercise 2: Decision cards

This exercise involves distributing cards, you need to decide in which “box” to place the
cards, and to consider the choices made by their fellow students.

1. Please read the decision cards as stated, and decide in which of the four boxes you
would like to place each card. The boxes are titled as follows: “in all cases”, “in most
cases”, “in some cases” and “never”.

2. Once you have decided in which box to place each decision card, write the number of
the card in the selected box.

3. After you complete the task, compare the selections of the student sitting next to you
with your own selections and identify any differences.
4. Focusing on the differences in your selections, discuss with your fellow student the
reasons for your respective selection decisions.
5. Following the discussion, feel free to change your selections. Please show your
changes by drawing an arrow to the new box.

6. Take note of the number of cards you changed.

Decision Cards
Decision Card 1 Decision Card 2 Decision Card 3
It is wrong for leaders to Leaders must consider the Leaders must always be
accept gifts from consequences of their role models for all
followers. actions and the effects followers.
they will have.
Decision Card 4 Decision Card 5 Decision Card 6
Under all conditions, It is enough for leaders to Leaders must act in
leaders must ensure that become an expert, as accordance with the
all followers participate in human relationships do not principle of equality.
the decision making. matter.

Boxes:
Box 1: never 2: in some 3: in most 4: in all cases
Box cases, Box cases Box
Decision Card 1
Decision Card 2
Decision Card 3
Decision Card 4
Decision Card 5
Decision Card 6

This exercise is to encourage you to make decisions in given situations and to evaluate
the decisions’ ethical dimensions from the point of view of others.

Exercise 3: Pop culture examples of ethical leadership

Either during class or at home before the class, look for a research online a current
example of ethical leadership among pop culture figures and celebrities. Evaluate it to
provide an explanation as to why this figure or celebrity demonstrates ethical
leadership.

Alternatively, you will prepare a two-minute video clip presenting the pop-culture ethical
leader of your choice.

Students guide
Appreciate how ethical leadership impacts and relates to your own lives, and to
articulate what ethical leadership means in your own terms. You should feel free to
select any pop culture figure as an example of ethical leadership. Here is some well-
known figure such as Bono, Oprah Winfrey, Beyoncé, Ivorian reggae singer Alpha
Blondie, Nigerian rapper Falz, or Chinese basketball player Yao Ming. Does the given
example have similarity in terms of ethical leadership from you? Justify your answer
why and how it appears with similarity?

Exercise 4: Case study: Telling the truth

Invite some classmates to consider the following case, taken from Robbins, Stephen P.
and David A. De Cenzo (1998). Fundamentals of management: Essential concepts and
applications (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Problem Situation: One of your co-employees has just been diagnosed with a treatable
form of cancer. He has confided in you about the status of his health. He has also asked
you not to say a word to anyone because he considers his health to be a personal
matter. Over the next few months, this employee is absent frequently, especially during
his radiation treatments. His absences are not a major problem for the company
because his duties involve direct computer work which he can do while at home.
However, some of your other co-employees have asked you what’s wrong with him.
You politely decline to discuss his situation. As a result, the other employees think that
their co-worker is getting special treatment, and are ready to go to your boss to
complain. You are confident that if they only knew of the employee’s illness, they would
understand. But you promised him not to reveal the reason for his absence. At the same
time, it would create unnecessary and unhelpful problems for him if other employees
complain about him.

Discuss briefly the following questions:

● Should you reveal to your employees the reason for their co-worker’s
absence? Why or why not?
● Should you explain to your boss what is really going on?
● How would you handle this situation?

Students Guide
You will be given a few minutes to read the short case and prepare individual answers
to the three questions. Discuss your answers in small groups and elect a spokesperson
to provide feedback to the plenary group. Ask the group spokespersons to provide
feedback. Summarize by explaining the dilemma (choosing between telling the truth and
being loyal to a friend), and highlighting how the application of different ethical theories
might lead to different actions.

Exercise 5: Case study: Stay neutral or not

You are the CEO of a large online platform that allows C2C business transactions
(transactions directly between customers). At a leadership summit, the CEO of a
videogame company approaches you to express his concern over discovering a
bootlegged version of a video game his company had begun to produce on your
platform. The CEO goes on to say that his company stopped the production of the game
after receiving too much criticism over how violent the game is. He asks if you would
consider taking down the game, not only because it is a bootlegged version, but also
because it is violent. Previously, you have never evaluated the products sold on your
platform since your company is protected under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act
(DMCA). The DMCA states that an online platform like yours cannot be held liable for
selling any particular product so long as the company does not selectively police its site.
If your company were to remove this product from the platform then, under the DMCA,
you should review all products being sold. This would require the hiring of a new team,
along with the added risk of significantly reduced transactions on your platform. If you
stay neutral and let the product stay, you could risk criticism from the public for allowing
the sale of such a violent game.

Direction: Discuss the decision you would have made if you were in this leader’s
position, and the reasons for that decision.

Student Guide
This case study involves a somewhat more complex ethical conflict for a leader
compared to the previous one. The guidelines for conducting this exercise are similar to
the previous one: You will be given a few minutes to read the short case and prepare
individual answers, discuss your answers in small groups and elect a spokesperson to
provide feedback to the plenary group. Ask the groups’ spokespersons to provide
feedback. Summarize by explaining the dilemma and highlighting how the application of
different ethical theories might lead to different actions.

Exercise 6: Turning knowledge into practice

The idea behind this exercise is to turn knowledge about ethical leadership into practical
guidelines. You are encouraged to carefully examine the ten activities Daft associates
with a moral leader, and then to review the five principles of ethical leadership
suggested by Northouse (see Key Issues section of the Module).

Daft summarizes the following ten activities of a moral leader:

1. Develop, articulate, and uphold high moral principles.
2. Focus on what is right for the organization as well as all the people involved.
3. Set the example you want others to live by.
4. Be honest with yourself and others.
5. Drive out fear and eliminate issues that cannot be discussed.
6. Establish and communicate ethics policies.
7. Develop a backbone - show zero tolerance for ethical violations.
8. Reward ethical conduct.
9. Treat everyone with fairness, dignity, and respect, from the lowest to the
highest level of the organization.
10.Do the right thing in both your private and professional life - even if no one is looking.

Northouse’s five principles of ethical leadership are as follows:

1. Ethical Leaders Respect Others: To do so means always to treat others as ends in
themselves and never as means to ends. Respect means that a leader listens closely to
followers, is empathic, and is tolerant of opposing points of view. It means treating
followers in ways that confirm their beliefs, attitudes, and values.

2. Ethical Leaders Serve Others: Leaders who serve are altruistic. They place their
followers’ welfare foremost in their plans. In practicing the principle of service, ethical
leaders must be willing to be follower-centered, must place others’ interests foremost in
their work, and must act in ways that will benefit others.

3. Ethical Leaders Are Just: Ethical leaders are concerned about issues of fairness and
justice. They make it a top priority to treat all of their followers in an equal manner. As a
rule, no one should receive special treatment or special consideration except when his
or her particular situation demands it. When individuals are treated differently, the
grounds for different treatment must be clear and reasonable, and must be based on
moral values.

4. Ethical Leaders Are Honest: Being honest is not just about telling the truth. It has to
do with being open with others and representing reality as fully and completely as
possible.

5. Ethical Leaders Build Community: Ethical leadership demands attention to a civic

virtue. Leaders and followers need to attend to more than their own mutually determined
goals. They need to attend to the community’s goals and purpose. An ethical leader is
concerned with the common good, in the broadest sense, paying attention to how the
changes proposed by a leader and followers will affect the larger organization, the
community, and society. After carefully considering the approaches of Northouse and
Daft, you are encouraged to critically evaluate these approaches, and come up with
your own set of practical guidelines for ethical leadership.

Students guide
This scenario provides an overview of these two approaches, and a few examples of
how this can work in practice. You are asked to study the lists of activities individually,
and then discuss them in small groups. You should also consider these approaches
critically. Do they agree with the lists? Invite students to prioritize items on the lists (for
example by picking their top three) and also to suggest new activities that can be added
to the lists. Each small group is given the opportunity to present their top three list to the
entire class and indicate the reasons behind their choices. Capture this on a whiteboard
in order to be able to identify common activities across the groups. After all groups have
presented their lists, summarizes it and concludes the exercise.

Student assessment:
An assignment to be completed within one week after the Module:

Select a leader and write an essay on the ethical leadership of the selected person,
focusing on one or more of the following questions:
• In your opinion, what characterizes a good leader? Do you think the leader is a good
leader? Why?
• How does being a good leader differ from being an ethical leader?
• Did this person face any ethical dilemmas during his or her career or lifetime?
• How did he or she respond to these dilemmas?
• Is it possible to identify a particular ethical theory that informed the choices made by
this person?
Length: between 2500 and 3000 words.

Video material
● Why good leaders make you feel safe?
https://www.ted.com/talks/simon_sinek_why_good_leaders_make_you_feel_safe
(11:56min).
● Are you a giver or taker?
https://www.ted.com/talks/adam_grant_are_you_a_giver_or_a_taker (13:29min).

● Everyday leadership https://www.ted.com/talks/drew_dudley_everyday_leadership

(6:11min)
 END OF MODULE 4
MODULE 5
Ethics, Diversity and Pluralism

Introduction
This Module explores the concepts of diversity, tolerance and pluralism. It examines
ways in which the acceptance of diversity may be difficult but can be understood and
accomplished by drawing on ideas and examples of ethical behavior. The Module
provides a menu of options and approaches for addressing ethical challenges involving
issues of race, religious belief, gender, sexual orientation, (dis)ability, political views,
and a range of others. It illustrates the relevant concepts through discussing historical
social systems in which tolerance and pluralism were evident, and historical role models
of integrity who provided inspirational leadership in modelling diversity and acceptance
in vexing situations. The Module also discusses moral quandaries in which solutions to
a moral dilemma are not clear-cut and require specific forms of ethical reasoning. The
discussion emphasizes and explores the importance of diversity not only in the context
of fairness to individuals and marginalized groups, but also as a means to improve
society as a whole. The Module engages the students with a variety of pedagogical
techniques, including mini-lecture, discussion, debate, and role playing, to encourage
participatory decision-making within both hypothetical and real-life diversity-sensitive
situations.

Learning outcomes
• Understand and define diversity, tolerance and pluralism
• Perceive the value of cultures, identities, histories, and points of view other than one’s
own
• Provide examples of moral role models whose actions promote the values of tolerance
and pluralism
• Demonstrate a preliminary understanding of more complex aspects of diversity such
as intersectionality, identity and subcultures

Key issues
The study of diversity, tolerance and pluralism, especially as these relate to culture,
race, nationality, religious belief, gender, (dis)ability, and sexual orientation, is a key
domain within ethics education since issues such as discrimination, misrepresentation
and ethnocentricity are related to fairness, justice, identity, equality, and other ethical
concerns. The study of diversity, tolerance and pluralism not only deepens our
understanding of the points of view and social contexts of people from multiple
backgrounds and life approaches, but also sensitizes us to the need to critically
evaluate our assumptions including our stereotypes about “otherness” obtained through
mass media, local bias, socialization, and first-hand exposure.

As noted in Module 1 of The Integrity and Ethics Module Series, ethics refers to “the
attempt to arrive at an understanding of the nature of human values, of how we ought to
live, and of what constitutes right conduct”. The dictionary definition of ethics is “the
study or the science of morals”. Moral is defined as “a sense of right and wrong”, and
being moral as “belonging or relating to the principles of good and evil, or right and
wrong”. In the broadest sense, therefore, ethics is “a way of life".

However, at the professional level, ethics is a “mode of moral reasoning” within specific
professions often formulated in codes, policies, best practices, guidelines, and similar
documents. In addition, ethics is an academic term which describes a branch of
philosophy devoted to moral reasoning. Finally, in the most commonly used sense of
the word, in many cultures “ethics” means virtue and subsets or synonyms of that term
such as integrity, character and honesty (Chambers, 1999).

Diversity comes from the English root word diverse, which simply means a state in
which there exist differences. Within the study of cultures, diversity pertains more
specifically to the honoring of all races, sexual orientations, religions, genders, as if they
are each an important hue within the rainbow. More recently, diversity has taken on the
added meaning of a cause which champions the equality and rights of all these groups
and is frequently linked with inclusion such that the phrase “diversity and inclusion”
emphasizes both the importance of difference and the necessity of making each
background and group feel important and included. In sociology, or the study of human
societies, diversity refers to the variety of inter-group relations regarding race,
nationality, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, and religious belief. Sociologists are
often interested in the patterns of prejudice and discrimination which exacerbate
differences and make them negatives, rather than positives, in the human condition.

Tolerance means the recognition of differences and the assumption that such
differences should be allowed in a society. Throughout history, many societies have
exercised forms of tolerance. The early Muslim empires, for instance, created spaces
for Christians and Jews to live among them, with their own legal systems and social
orders. The idea of tolerance as a formal principle, however, comes from the liberal
tradition. The English political philosopher, John Locke (1632-1704), articulated the idea
of toleration in a series of letters he wrote in the late 17th and early 18th centuries. In
these letters, Locke argued for tolerance of differences in religious belief and practice,
differences that were an important cause of the British civil wars of the 17th century.

Finally, the word pluralism means not simply the grudging acceptance of differences in
a social setting, but a recognition that such differences will improve the social order. A
plural order is one in which a multiplicity of groups will make a social system better.
Pluralism is often associated with democracy, for it is a condition of a democratic
system that diversity in social and political matters will make a system more legitimate
and effective. Some democratic systems allow pluralism to operate directly by giving
interest groups the ability to access law makers, hence allowing their different views to
be part of a successful social and political order.

Another term for pluralism is acceptance. At the broadest level this concept pertains to
being at peace with situations, peoples, conditions, and attitudes as they are. However,
within the context of ethics and diversity, acceptance means the ability to welcome if not
champion differences in all types of human demographics whether by age, lifestyle,
gender, orientation, race, ability, religion, and other categories. In some contexts,
“acceptance” can also pertain to “surrender” or “yielding” to either a higher power or to a
particular way of life and its rules. Throughout history, different ethical and religious
traditions have sought to negotiate the differences that exist within their societies.
Imperial systems which conquered and then sought to amalgamate different religious
beliefs provide some of the earliest evidence of how to deal with a plurality of beliefs or
differences. One of the best examples of this comes from the ancient Persian Empire
ruled by Cyrus the Great (600 – 530 B.C.). Cyrus ruled a large empire that stretched
across the modern-day Middle East and Central Asia. When he came to power, Cyrus
allowed conquered peoples to return to their homelands and, rather radically for his day
and ours, contributed to the rebuilding of destroyed religious monuments. Famously, the
Hebrew Scriptures identify Cyrus as a messiah-like figure for his role in rebuilding
the Temple in Jerusalem.

Cyrus’ reputation as a defender of pluralism was further reinforced with the discovery of
the Cyrus Cylinder. This small round object has writing in ancient Babylonian which
describes the conquest by Cyrus of the Babylonian Empire and his decision to allow
and even encourage a diversity of religious and ethnic groups throughout his empire.
The cylinder, discovered in the late 19th century, is now kept at the British Museum. In
recent years, it has been referred to as one of the earliest documents about human
rights. As stated by the director of the British Museum, Neil MacGregor, this is not really
accurate. The document does not refer to individual rights at all, and the ancient world
rarely had any conception of the rights of individuals (2013).

Rather, the document is better understood as one of the first attempts to deal with
ethnic and religious diversity. It not only provides an example of tolerance, but of
pluralism. Cyrus did not simply allow groups to live in peace but he actively encouraged
them to rebuild their temples. We do not know exactly why he did this, as our evidence
of his historical context is limited. However, his actions, as represented both in the
Hebrew Scriptures and the Cyrus Cylinder, do suggest he was someone who advocated
an early form of pluralism. How a society should respond to diversity has long been an
ethical challenge. From the evidence we have, Cyrus was able to address this in a
creative way, but not all societies have been able to do this peacefully. In 17th-century
Britain, for instance, civil war broke out as a result of religious diversity (along with other
reasons). In 1534, King Henry VIII of Great Britain signed the Act of Supremacy, which
declared him the Supreme Head of the Church of England. This act removed the
religious authority of the Pope in Rome, which led to the creation of the Protestant
Church of England. The reasons for this break are complicated, and include Henry’s
desire for a divorce from his wife. Whatever the reasons, this break-up of a unified
Christian church in Great Britain led to a series of conflicts over the next 150 years,
culminating in violent civil war. The war pitted Catholics who still believed in the
authority of the Pope against Protestants who believed that the monarch in Great Britain
should have authority over Christians. These disagreements were not only about who
was in charge of the church. They were also about specific matters of worship and
prayer, such as what kind of prayer book should be used and what dress the priests and
ministers should wear. So, the violence of the civil war was, in one sense, largely about
a failure to accept diversity on matters of religious belief and practice.

One influential philosopher mentioned above who lived during this period was John
Locke. Locke was trained as a physician. He was famous in his day for writing about
sensory perceptions, which combined his medical knowledge with philosophical ideas
about perception, memory, and language. But today he is most famous for his political
writings. His book, Second Treatise on Government, which appeared in 1691,
influenced the French and American revolutionaries as it argued that all peoples have
the right to resist an unjust government and should be able to create their own. He also
wrote a series of letters which are now called Letters on Toleration. The most famous
one, known as Letter Concerning Toleration, was published in 1689. In the letter, Locke
argues that the state should not be involved in religious matters, and that these should
be left up to individual conscience; that is, he argues that a society should tolerate
religious diversity in order to be more peaceful. Locke argued that if groups use violence
against each other in order to create new beliefs, those beliefs will not be real; someone
forced to believe something will not really believe it.

So, in matters of religion, violence will never succeed in converting others. The conflicts
taking place in his day were not just between Catholics and Protestants but between
different sects within Protestantism as well. Ironically, Locke does not allow toleration
among all groups; he says that those who do not believe in any god should not be
accepted into society. He also says in the letter that only if Catholics give up some of
their more extreme beliefs will they be able to be part of society. So, even in a letter on
toleration, Locke is perhaps not as tolerant as we would imagine he should be (Uzgalis,
2017). Some have argued that Locke is not just advocating toleration but making the
stronger claim for pluralism. That is, he suggests that a society that has a diversity of
religious groups will be a better society because all people will be happy. This is not
developed fully in Locke’s thought, however, and most people see his work as a
defence of toleration, the more limited recognition of diversity rather than the embrace
of diverse peoples and groups. Locke has been an important thinker for liberals around
the world, especially on this matter of tolerance. But, of course, not all people would
agree with Locke on this. The issues faced by leaders such as Cyrus and philosophers
such as Locke revolved largely around diversity in religious belief. Other issues of
diversity emerged in the 18th and 19th centuries, largely around race, ethnicity and
nationalism.
Versions of these ideas existed prior to this period, but only with the rise of the nation
state and the development of scientific theories around race and development did they
become issues of diversity. While the scientific theories that focused on race have
largely been discredited, especially as they were used to justify practices of slavery,
race continues to be a category by which individuals distinguish themselves. Into the
20th and 21st centuries, identities around gender and sexual orientation have become
more prominent as categories of diversity. Certainly, the category of gender is one of
the oldest, with the differences between men and women shaping much of history. It is
only with the rise of feminist thinking, partly in the Enlightenment, but more fully
developed in the 20th century, that gender distinctions have become political issues
around which theories of diversity have developed. In the contemporary era, gender has
become a more fluid idea in some contexts, with arguments being made that individuals
should be able to change their genders, either medically or simply through behavioral
changes. Sexual orientation has also become a politicized form of identity, one that has
resulted in efforts to protect the rights of gay, lesbian and bisexual individuals. The
United Nations Office of the Human Rights Commissioner has developed a program in
support of diversity, tolerance and pluralism in this area. In the present E4J module
series, Module 9 (Gender Dimensions of Ethics) discusses feminist ethical theories that
respond to gender-based discrimination against women and aim to enhance gender
diversity and equality.

As is evident, there is a range of different identities that can create a diverse society.
These identities can be ones that we freely choose (religious belief) or ones with which
we are born (race, gender, ethnicity). It is not always clear which identities we choose to
adopt and which are we born with. One ethical question to consider wouldbe if it matters
whether we are born with an identity or whether we choose it. For instance, in the past,
sexual orientation has been one that people believed was a choice. In the 20th century,
medical arguments emerged which said it was an identity with which we are born. New
medical procedures now allow people to choose their gender. In any ethical evaluation,
the matter of choice is crucial, though we should consider whether or not an identity that
is chosen is less valid than an identity with which we are born, and whether it should
matter in how we treat each other.

One term that has emerged in recent years which highlights the different parts of our
identity is intersectionality. This term refers to the interconnected nature of social
identities such as race, gender, class and sexual orientation that can define a person or
a group. It was introduced by a legal scholar, Kimberle Crenshaw, in an analysis of legal
forms of discrimination (1991). The term is useful because it allows us to see that while
we might highlight one part of an individual’s identity, even in a positive way, this might
downplay other parts of that person’s identity. Crenshaw was interested in the way that
women’s rights activists did not always consider questions of race, as a black woman’s
experience of discrimination, for instance, might be very different than that of a white
woman. The life of Bayrd Rustin (1912-1987), the American civil rights activist, gives an
example of the challenges of intersectionality. Rustin was born in Pennsylvania to a
Quaker family. As an African-American, he became involved early in his life with efforts
to end discrimination in the United States. He also focused on the economic exploitation
of not only blacks but all people, briefly joining the American Communist Party. He was
also gay, which meant that he did not serve as a public face for the civil rights
movement, though he was actively involved with many of the leaders on this issue.
Rustin fought not only for civil rights for black Americans, but also for gay rights and the
rights of those who were in the lower classes. Combining these identities challenged
many in the American rights movement who believed that sexual orientation would
distract the cause of civil rights activists, but Rustin argued that these identities must be
seen as interconnected and the diversity they create must be embraced.

Cyrus was an individual leader who was faced with an ethical challenge: How can I
govern a diverse empire with a wide range of different belief systems? Locke used his
position as an intellectual to convince the leaders of his day how to act. And Rustin
served as an adviser to many leaders in the civil rights movement in the United States.
Leaders all over the world must make these decisions, but so must all of us in our
everyday lives. This Module emphasizes the importance of diversity. Students will
encounter ethical dilemmas related to diversity by reading first-hand accounts of actual
historical challenges faced by leaders, such as Cyrus, and moral role models. Video
excerpts will reinforce these case studies and challenges. Students will also discuss the
ways in which they would have handled similar challenges, and will thus be introduced
to both theoretical and real-world issues of diversity along the way. Personal
participation, screenings, and mini-lectures will be complemented by reflective
assignments.

This Module builds on the definitions of integrity and ethics provided in Module 1
(Integrity and Ethics: Introduction and Conceptual Framework) of the present module
series, as well as that Module’s discussion of ethical decision-making and how to deal
with ethical dilemmas.

References
Chambers 21st Century Dictionary (1999). Edinburgh, Chambers.

Crenshaw, Kimberle (1991). Mapping the margins: intersectionality, identity politics,

and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, Vol. 43, No. 6, pp.
1241-1299. Available from https://www.jstor.org/stable/i252720.

MacGregor, Neil (2013). The Cyrus Cylinder: A great moment for the Middle East.
Posted
by The Economist, 12 March. Video. Available from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pX1P0DayOrc.

Uzgalis, William (2017). "John Locke." The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy,

Edward N. Zalta, ed. Available from
https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/locke/.

Exercises
This section contains suggestions for in-class educational exercises, while a post-class
assignment for assessing student understanding of the Module is suggested in a
separate section.

The exercises in this section are most appropriate for classes of up to 50 students,
where students can be easily organized into small groups in which they discuss cases
or conduct activities before group representatives provide feedback to the entire class.
Although it is possible to have the same small group structure in large classes
comprising a few hundred students, it is more challenging and the lecturer might wish to
adapt facilitation techniques to ensure sufficient time for group discussions as well as
providing feedback to the entire class. The easiest way to deal with the requirement for
small group discussion in a large class is to ask students to discuss the issues with the
four or five students sitting close to them.
Given time limitations, not all groups will be able to provide feedback in each exercise. It
is recommended that the lecturer makes random selections and tries to ensure that all
groups get the opportunity to provide feedback at least once during the session. If time
permits, the lecturer could facilitate a discussion in plenary after each group has
provided feedback.

Exercise 1: I Am Malala
Reflect on the following questions, drawing on the pre-assigned reading of the excerpt
(pp. 183-190) from I Am Malala:

1) Can diversity principles ignore the teachings of prevailing local religions that in this
case might encourage discrimination against girls and women?

2) What can Malala’s father’s behavior tell us about diversity, tolerance and pluralism?

Write down your answers, what will be your advocacy, exchange views with fellow
classmates and listen carefully to the views of others. Make sure to encourage as many
of them as possible to participate in the discussion.

Exercise 2: DNA testing video

Introduce students to the complexity of the concepts of diversity, tolerance and
pluralism, by showing them this eight-minute documentary that demonstrates our
common ancestry and mixed racial and geographical backgrounds. Find short video
about a group of people from diverse background who underwent a DNA test that had
surprising results about their racial identity and heritage.

Write down answers, view and listen carefully to the views of others. Make sure to
encourage as many of them as possible to participate in the discussion. If time permits,
have the students first consider the issues in small groups before discussing them with
the entire class.
Discuss the following questions:
1) Should we just accept what this video communicates? Or should we try to also
find out if it is scientifically accurate?
2) 2) How do you think you would find out if it is accurate?

Exercise 3: Mandela’s The Long Walk to Freedom

This exercise asks students to draw on the pre-assigned reading of the excerpt (pp. 50-
55) from The Long Walk to Freedom. (Search for the speech of Nelson Mandela)

The excerpt describes Nelson Mandela’s first major ethical/racial (in)justice case, when
his university president threatens him with expulsion if he does not violate the wishes of
other students he represents who are involved in a boycott and school election.

Small groups, discuss what would have done if you were in Mandela’s shoes.
In particular, address these three questions:

1) In the excerpt you have just read, how do we make judgments about their behavior?
Is either person morally correct? Or are both of them right “in their own way”?

2) How might you have handled the problems based upon race, role, and age
emphasized in this excerpt?
3) Education is supposed to help diminish intolerance, ignorance, and discrimination.
And yet Mandela experienced what he called institutional racism in this case within his
own university. Are educational courses like this one an antidote to racism or does
higher education embalm and transmit “eternal” problems of human nature which
cannot be changed in diversity and ethics courses? How important and practical is what
we are doing in this class?
Choose a spokesperson who can report the group’s answers to the class. The
spokesperson should explain the rationale for why the group chose their answers, and
give a “minority report” on behalf of any member of the group who had a different
opinion.

Another version of this exercise would be to ask two students to conduct a role play of
Nelson Mandela’s ethical dilemma, and then ask the other students to discuss the case
study they have just seen enacted by addressing the above three questions.

Exercise 4: Video montage of three moral role models.

Search for a video montage of three different moral role models – Gandhi, Mother
Theresa, and Bayard Rustin, and subsequently leads a discussion of differences and
commonalities of the three role models, particularly focusing on their approach to ethics
and diversity.
Analyze and write down their thoughts about – the differences and commonalities of the
three role models in terms of their approach to ethics and diversity.
Subsequently, role play their advocative views and listen carefully to the views of
others. Make sure to encourage as many of them as possible to participate in the
discussion.

Exercise 5: An Intersectional Constitution

In this exercise, take on the persona of different religious/cultural/ideological figures,
and develop a short constitution with a bill of rights for the society in which they will live
together.
All roles should be ones that are committed to the exercise, i.e., students cannot claim
that they are individuals who would resist the entire project.
Possible roles to take may include:
1. Hindu activist from India
2. Chinese Communist party member
3. American transgender activist
4. Palestinian Hamas leader
5. Venezuelan Catholic liberation theologian
6. Any other role that would be relevant in that particular context

This short constitution should reflect their differences and yet also provide protection to
ensure that those differences do not prevent a functioning social and political system.
Students should be asked to think about questions of intersectionality and pluralism as
they develop their constitutional framework. The students should be given time to
research and understand their roles, before they begin to develop the document.

Guidelines
The roles assigned can also be a mix of male and female, and can be expanded to
whatever you think is most relevant to the context in which being taught. Some roles
might be too controversial for certain contexts, but the point is to encourage you to think
outside of their particular framework, so taking on different roles is an important
challenge to you.

In writing a constitution, you should look at the constitution of the country in which they
live. Almost all constitutions share similar features.
They begin with a Preamble which sets out the purpose and goals of their country. This
is a place where they can articulate the importance of diversity or multiculturalism.

Constitutions then include articles on how laws are made (a legislature), who enforces
the laws (the executive) and who makes judgments about the laws (the judiciary). They
should also include a list of rights which can focus on individuals, groups, or even things
like the environment.
Exercise 6: Model United Nations simulation
Choose the country that you will defend in a small Model United Nations simulation,
ideally one which is not your own, nor one you know well. You will also choose a debate
topic to defend. Participants will sit around a large table with placards in front of you with
the name of the countries they researched and represent the perspective of that
country. They will each advocate for the unique ethical systems or policies in the
country they represent. Students may give short reports or, if time permits, challenge or
cooperate with the other “diplomats” at the table to learn more about the other countries
represented around the table and their ethics system(s).

End of Module 6
Happy Semesterly Break