Module 7

VIRTUE ETHICS

Expectations:
At the end of the topic, the students are expected to:
1. articulate virtue ethics;
2. practice the virtue ethics in day to day undertakings.

Engagement:

Directions: Make a poster and slogan on how you describe happiness. Provide a short
explanation below.

1
Exploration:

What is Virtue Ethics?

Virtue Ethics is the ethical framework that is concerned with understanding the
good as a matter of developing the virtuous character of a person. Previous chapters
emphasized different aspects of ethics: consequences of an act for utilitarianism, natural
inclinations for natural law, and autonomy for deontology. Virtue ethics, on the other hand,
focuses on the formation of one’s character brought by determining and doing virtuous
acts. The two major thinkers of Ancient Greece, Plato and Aristotle had discourses
concerning virtue. But Aristotle’s book entitled Nicomachean Ethics is the first
comprehensive and pragmatic study of virtue ethics.

Aristotle’s discourse of ethics departs from the Platonic understanding of reality

and conception of the good. Both Plato and Aristotle affirm rationality as the highest
faculty of a person and having such characteristic enables a person to realize the very
purpose of her existence. But at the end, they differ in their appreciation of reality and
nature, which in turn, results in their contrasting strand on what the ethical principle should
be.

For Plato, the real is outside the realm of any human sensory experience but can
somehow be grasped by one’s intellect. The truth and ultimately, the good ae in the
sphere of forms or ideas transcending daily human condition. On the other hand, for
Aristotle the real is found within our everyday encounter with objects in the world. What
makes nature intelligible is its character of having both form and matter. Therefore, the
truth and the good cannot exist apart from the object and are not independent of our
experience.
Happiness and Ultimate Purpose
Aristotle begins his discussion of ethics by showing that every act that a person
does is directed toward a particular purpose, aim, or what the Greeks called telos. There
is a purpose why one does something, and for Aristotle, a person’s action manifests a
good that she aspires for. Every pursuit of a person hopes to achieve a good. One eats
for the purpose of the good that it gives sustenance to the body. A person pursues a
chosen career, aiming for good that is to provide a better future for her family. A person
will not do anything which is not beneficial to her. Even a drug user “ thinks” that substance
abuse will cause her good. This does not necessarily mean that using drugs is good but
a “ drug addict” would want to believe that such act is good. Therefore, for Aristotle, the
good is considered to be the telos or purpose for which all acts seek to achieve.
One must understand that an individual does actions and pursuits in life and
correspondingly each of these activities has different aims. Aristotle is aware that one
does an act not only to achieve a particular purpose but also believe such purpose but
also believes such purpose can be utilized for higher goal or activity, which then can be

2
use to achieved an even higher purpose and so on. In other words, the different goods
that one pursues form a hierarchy of teloi (plural form of telos). It is important for Aristotle
that one becomes clear of the hierarchy of goals that the different acts produce in order
for a person to distinguish which actions are higher than the other. With the condition that
there is a hierarchy of telos, Aristotle then asks about the highest purpose, which is the
ultimate good of a human being. Aristotle discusses the general criteria in order for one
to recognize the highest good of man. First, the highest good of a person must be final.
As a final end, it is no longer utilized for the sake of arriving at a much higher end. Second,
the ultimate telos of a person must be self- sufficient. Satisfaction in life is arrived at once
this highest good is attained. Nothing else is sought after and desired, once this self-
sufficient goal is achieved, since this is already considered as the best possible good in
life. It is interesting to note that for Aristotle, the question can only be adequately
answered by other individuals because they have gone through enormous and
challenging life experiences which helped them gain a wealth of knowledge on what the
ultimate purpose of a person. According to Aristotle, older individuals would agree that
the highest purpose and the ultimate good of man is happiness, or for the Greeks,
eudaimonia. One can therefore say that happiness seems to fit the first criterion of being
the final end of human being. For it is clear that conditions for having wealth, power, and
pleasures are not chosen for themselves but for the sake of being means to achieve
happiness. If one accumulates wealth, for example, she would want to have not just
richness but also power and other desirable things as well, such as honor and pleasures.
But all of these ends are ultimately for the sake of the final end which is happiness. In
itself, happiness seems to be the final end and the highest good of a person since no
other superior end is still being desired for. Happiness for Aristotle is the only self-
sufficient aim that can aspire for. No amount of wealth or power can be more fulfilling than
having achieved the condition of happiness. One can imagine a life of being wealthy,
powerful, and experiencing pleasurable feelings and yet, such life is still not satisfying
without happiness. Once happiness is achieved, things such as wealth, power, and
pleasurable feelings just value-added benefits in life. The true measure of well-being for
Aristotle is not by means of richness or frame but by the condition of having attained a
happy life. According to Aristotle, If an individual’s action can achieve the highest good,
then one must investigate how she functions which enables her to achieve her ultimate
purpose. If she performs her functions which enables her to achieve her ultimate purpose.
If she performs her function well, then she is capable of arriving at happiness. For
Aristotle, what defines human beings is her function or activity of reason. This function
makes her different from the rest of beings. What defines a person therefore is her
function or activity of reason. A person’s action to be considered as truly human must be
an act that is always in accordance to a reason. The function of a human being is to act
following the dictates of her reason. Any person for that matter utilizes her reason but
Aristotle further says that a person cannot only perform her function but she can also
perform it well. What distinguishes a good person from other human beings is her rational
activity that is performed well or excellently. A good individual therefore stands closer to
meeting the conditions of happiness because her actions are of a higher purpose. Any

3
human being can perform the activity of reason; thus being human is achievable.
However, a good human strives hard in doing an activity in an excellent way. Therefore,
the task of being human becomes more difficult because doing such activity well takes
more effort on the part of the person.
Virtue as Excellence
Achieving the highest purpose of a human person concerns the ability to function
according to reason and to perform an activity well or excellently. This excellent way of
doing things is called virtue or arete by the Greeks. Aristotle is quick to add that virtue is
something that one strives for in time. One does not become an excellent person
overnight: “ For one swallow does not make a summer, nor does one day; and so too one
day, or a short time, does not make a man blessed and happy..” This means that being
virtuous cannot be accomplished by a single act. It is commendable if a minor participant
in a crime becomes a whistle blower, exposing all the grave acts that were committed by
his cohort. But one should be careful in judgement of calling immediately that individual
as being a “ person of virtue”. Being an excellent individual works on doing well in her
day-to day existence.
Aristotle says that excellence is an activity of the human soul and therefore, one
needs to understand the very structure of a person’s soul which must be directed by her
rational activity in an excellent way. For Aristotle, the human soul is divided into two
parts: the irrational element and the rational faculty. The irrational element of man
consists of the vegetative and appetitive aspects. The vegetative aspect functions as
giving nutrition and providing the activity of physical growth in a person. As an irrational
element, this part of man is not in the realm where virtue is exercised because, as the
term suggest, it cannot be dictated by reason. The vegetative aspect of the soul follows
the natural processes involved in the physical activities and growth of a person. Whereas,
the appetitive aspect works as a desiring faculty of man. The act of desiring in itself is an
impulse that naturally runs counter to reason and most of the time refuses to go long with
reason. Thus, this aspect works as a desiring faculty of man. The act of desiring in itself
is an impulse that naturally runs counter to reason and most of the time refuses to go
along with reason. Thus, this aspect belongs to the irrational part of the soul. Sexual
impulse, for example , is strong in a person that one tends to ignore reasonable demands
to control such impulse. However, unlike the vegetative aspect, the desiring faculty of
man can be subjected to reason. Aristotle says. “… Now even this semms to have a share
in the rational prionciple, as we said; at any rate in the continent man it obeys the rational
principle..” Desires are subject to reason even though these do not asrise from rational
part of the soul.
In contrast, the rational faculty of man exercises excellence in him. One can rightly
or wrongly apply the use of reason in this part. This faculty is further divided into two
aspects: moral, which concerns the act of doing, and intellectual, which concerns the act
of knowing. These two aspects are basically where the function of reason is exercised.

4
 One rational aspect where a person can attain excellence is in intellectual faculty
of the soul. As stated by Aristotle, this excellence is attained through teaching. Through
time, one learns from the vast experiences in life where she gains knowledge on these
things. One learns and gains wisdom by being taught or by learning. There are two ways
by which one can attain intellectual excellence: philosophic and pratical. Philosophic
wisdom deals with attaining knowledge about the fundamental principles and truths that
govern the universe(e.g. general theory on the origins of things). It helps one understand
in general the meaning of life. Practical wisdom, on the other hand, is an excellence in
knowing the right conduct in carrying out a particular act. In other words, one can attain
a wisdom that can provide us with a guide to behave in our daily lives.
Moral Virtue and Mesotes
As maintained by Aristotle, it is the middle, intermediate, or mesotes for the Greeks
that is aimed at by a morall virtuous person. Determining the middle becomes the proper
tool by which one can arrive at the proper way of doing things. A morally virtuous person
is concerned with achieving her appropriate action in a manner that is neither excessive
nor deficient. In other words virtue is the middle or the intermediary point in between
extremes. One has to function for a particular act. Generally, feelings and passions are
neutral which means that, themselves, they are neither morally right nor wrong. When
one shows a feeling of anger we cannot immediately construe it as morally wrong act.
But the rightness or wrongness of feelings, passions, and abilities lies in the degree of
their application in a given situation. It is right to get angry at an offensive remark but it is
not to get angry at everyone just because you were offended by someone. One can be
excessive in the manner by which she manifest these feelings, passion, and abilities. But
one can be deficient in the way she expresses these. For example, she may be outraged
at the attacjs of terrorists and yet may be insensitive because she is not affected.
A morally virtuous person targets the mesotes. For Aristotle, the task of targeting
the mean is always difficult because every situation is different from one another. Thus,
the mesotes is constantly moving depending on the circumstance where she is in. The
mean is not the same for all individuals. As pointed by Aristotle, the mean is simply an
arithmetical proportion. Therefore, the task of being moral involves seriously looking into
and understanding a situation and assessing properly every particular detail relevant
to the determination of the mean. One can be angry with someone, but the degree and
state of anger depends accordingly with the nature of the person she is angry with. The
aid of reason dictates how humans should show different anger toward a child and a
mature individual. Mesotes determines whether the act applied is not excessive or
difficient. Likewise, an individual cannot be good at doing something haphazardly but
reason demands a continuous habituation of a skill to perfect an act. Targetting the
middle entails being immersed in a moral circumstance, understanding the experience,
and eventually, developing the knowledge of identifying the proper way or the mean to
address a particular situation.

5
 Aristotle’s discussion ultimately leads to defining leads to defining what exactly
moral virtue is- “a state of character concerned with choice,lying in a mean, that is, the
mean relative to us, this being determined by a rational principle, and by that principle by
which the man of practical wisdom would determine it”.
Moral virtue is firstly the condition arrived at by a person who has a character
identified out of her habitual exercise of particular action. Secondly, in moral virtue, the
action done that normally manifests feelings and passions is chosen because it is the
middle. The middle does not fall short or is excessive of the proper proportion by which
these feelings or passions should be expressed. Aristotle adds that the middle is relative
to us. This does not imply the mesotes depends on what the person identifies as the
middle such case would signify that Aristotle adheres to relativism. But Aristotle’s middle
is not relative to the person but to the situation and the circumstance that one is in. This
means that in choosing the middle, one is looking at the stuation and not at oneself in
identifying the proper way that feelings and passions should be dispensed.
Thirdly, the rational faculty that serves as guide for the proper identification of the
middle is practical wisdom. The virtuous person learns from her experiences and
therefore develops the capacity to know the proper way of carrying out her feelings,
passions, and actions. The rational faculties of this person, specifically practical wisdom,
aid in making a virtuous person develop this habit of doing the good. A moral person in
this sense is also someone who is wise. Habit is not simply borne out repetitive and non-
thought-of activities in a person. One sees Aristotle’s attempt to establish a union between
the person’s moral action and knowledge that enables him to achieve man’s function.
Aristotle clarifies further that not all feelings, passions, and actions have a middle
point. Whena mean is sought, it is in the context of being able to identify the good act in
a given situation. However, when what is involved is seen as a bad feeling, passion, or
action the middle is non- existent because there is no good (mesotes) in something that
is already considered a bad act. As an act of violence, in itself, is bad a person cannot
employ violence as if it were virtue or a middle measure in between vices of being
“deficient” in violence or being “excessive” of the same act. There is something terribly
wrong in such demonstration.
Aristotle also provides examples of particular virtues and the corresponding
excesses and deficiencies of these.
Excess Middle Deficiency
Impulsiveness Self-control Indecisiveness
Recklessness Courage Cowardice
Prodigality Liberality Meanness
In the table, Aristotle identifies the virtue of courage as the middle, in between the
vices of being coward and reckless, Cowardice is a defiency in terms of feelings and
passions. This means that one lacks the capacity to muster enough bravery of carrying
herself appropriately in a given situation. Recklessness, on the other hand, is an excess

6
in terms of one’s feelings and passions. In this regard, one acts with a surplus or guts that
she overdoes an act in such rashness and without any deliberation. The virtue of having
courage is being able to act daringly enough but able to weigh up possible implications
of such act that she proceeds with caution.

Function Argument
All objects have telos. An object is good when it properly secures its telos. Given
the above, hopefully these steps of the argument are clear so far. At this point, Aristotle
directs his thinking towards human beings specifically. The telos of a human being is
to reason. The good for a human being is, therefore, acting in accordance with reason.
In working out our true function, Aristotle looks to that feature that separates man
from other living animals. According to Aristotle, what separates mankind from the rest of
the world is our ability not only to reason but to act on reasons. Thus, just as the function
of a chair can be derived from its uniquely differentiating characteristic, so the function of
a human being is related to our uniquely differentiating characteristic and we achieve the
good when we act in accordance with this true function or telos.
The notion that man has a true function may sound odd, particularly if you do not
have a religious worldview of your own. However, to you especially Aristotle wrote that
“… as eye, hand, foot and in general each of the parts evidently has a function, may one
lay it down that man similarly has a function apart from all these?” On the basis that we
would ascribe a function to our constituent parts — we know what makes a good kidney
for example — so too Aristotle thinks it far from unreasonable that we have a function as
a whole. Indeed, this may be plausible if we consider other objects. The component parts
of a car, for example, have individual functions but a car itself, as a whole, has its own
function that determines whether or not it is a good car.

Aristotelian Goodness
Based on the previous argument, the good life for a human being is achieved when
we act following our telos. However, rather than leaving the concept of goodness as
general and abstract, we can say more specifically what the good for a human involves.
Aristotle uses the Greek term eudaimonia to capture the state that we experience if we
fully achieve a good life. According to Aristotle, eudaimonia is the state that all humans
should aim for as it is the aim and end of human existence. To reach this state, we must
act following reason. Properly understanding what Aristotle means by eudaimonia is
crucial to understanding his Virtue Ethical moral position.
Eudaimonia has been variously translated and no perfect translation has yet been
identified. While all translations have their own issues, eudaimonia understood as
flourishing is perhaps the most helpful translation and improves upon a simple translation
of happiness. The following example may make this clearer.
Naomi is an extremely talented pianist. Some days, she plays music that simply
makes her happy, perhaps the tune from the television soap opera “Neighbours” or a
rendition of “Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star”. On other days, she plays complex music such
as the supremely difficult Chopin-Godowsky Études. These performances may also make
Naomi happy, but she seems to be flourishing as a pianist only with the latter

7
performances rather than the former. If we use the language of function, both
performances make Naomi happy but she fulfils her function as a pianist (and is a good
pianist) only when she flourishes with the works of greater complexity.
Flourishing in life may make us happy but happiness itself is not necessarily well
aligned with acting in accordance with our telos. Perhaps, if we prefer the term happiness
as a translation for eudaimonia we mean really or truly happy, but it may be easier to stay
with the understanding of eudaimonia as flourishing when describing the state of acting
in accordance with our true function.
Aristotle concludes that a life is eudaimon (adjective of eudaimonia) when it
involves “… the active exercise of the mind in conformity with perfect goodness or
virtue”. Eudaimonia is secured not as the result exercising of our physical or animalistic
qualities but as the result of the exercise of our distinctly human rational and cognitive
aspects.

Eudaimonia and Virtue

The quotation provided at the end of section three was the first direct reference to
virtue in the explanatory sections of this chapter. With Aristotle’s theoretical
presuppositions now laid out, we can begin to properly explain and evaluate his
conception of the virtues and their link to moral thinking.
According to Aristotle, virtues are character dispositions or personality traits. This
focus on our dispositions and our character, rather than our actions in isolation, is what
earns Aristotelian Virtue Ethics the label of being an agentcentred moral theory rather
than an act-centered moral theory.

Act-Centered Moral Theories

Utilitarianism and Kantian Ethics are two different examples of act-centred moral
theories due to their focus on actions when it comes to making moral assessments and
judgments. Act-centred moral theories may be teleological or deontological, absolutist or
relativist, but they share a common worldview in that particular actions are bearers of
moral value — either being right or wrong.

Agent-Centred Moral Theories

Aristotelian Virtue Ethics is an agent-centred theory in virtue of a primary focus on
people and their characters rather than singular actions. For Aristotle, morality has more
to do with the question “how should I be?” rather than “what should I do?” If we answer
the first question then, as we see later in this chapter, the second question may begin to
take care of itself. When explaining and evaluating Aristotelian Virtue Ethics you must
keep in mind this focus on character rather than specific comments on the morality of
actions.
Aristotle refers to virtues as character traits or psychological dispositions. Virtues
are those particular dispositions that are appropriately related to the situation and, to link
back to our function, encourage actions that are in accordance with reason. Again, a more
concrete example will make clear how Aristotle identifies virtues in practice.

8
 All of us, at one time or another, experience feelings of anger. For example, I may
become angry when my step-son thoughtlessly eats through the remaining crisps without
saving any for others, or he may feel anger when he has to wait an extra minute or two
to be picked up at work because his stepfather is juggling twenty-six different tasks and
momentarily loses track of time (how totally unfair of him…). Anyway, as I was saying,
back to Aristotle, “Anyone can become angry — that is easy. But to be angry with the
right person, to the right degree, at the right time, for the right purpose, and in the right
way — that is not easy”.
For Aristotle, virtue is not a feeling itself but an appropriate psychological
disposition in response to that feeling; the proper response. The correct response to a
feeling is described as acting on the basis of the Golden Mean, a response that is neither
excessive nor deficient. The table below makes this more apparent.

Vice of Virtuous Disposition Vice of

Feeling/Emotion
Deficiency (Golden Mean) Excess

Anger Lack of spirit Patience Irascibility

Shame Shyness Modesty Shamefulness

Fear Cowardice Courage Rashness

Indignation Spitefulness Righteousness Envy

Anger is a feeling and therefore is neither a virtue nor a vice. However, the correct
response to anger — the Golden Mean between two extremes — is patience, rather than
a lack of spirit or irascibility. Virtues are not feelings, but characteristic dispositional
responses that, when viewed holistically, define our characters and who we are.
The Golden Mean ought not to be viewed as suggesting that a virtuous disposition
is always one that gives rise to a “middling” action. If someone puts their life on the line,
when unarmed, in an attempt to stop a would-be terrorist attack, then their action may be
rash rather than courageous. However, if armed with a heavy, blunt instrument their life-
risking action may be courageously virtuous rather than rash. The Golden Mean is not to
be understood as suggesting that we always act somewhere between complete inaction
and breathless exuberance, but as suggesting that we act between the vices of excess
and deficiency; such action may well involve extreme courage or exceptional patience.
In addition to feelings, Aristotle also suggests that we may virtuously respond to
situations. He suggests the following examples.

Vice of Virtuous Disposition

Situation Vice of Excess
Deficiency (Golden Mean)

Social Self-serving
Cantankerousness Friendliness
conduct flattery

Conversation Boorishness Wittiness Buffoonery

9
 Giving money Stinginess Generosity Profligacy

We must keep in mind the agent-centered nature of Aristotelian Virtue Ethics when
considering these examples. A person does not cease to have a witty disposition in virtue
of a single joke that might err on the side of buffoonery, or cease to be generous because
they fail to donate to charity on one occasion. Our psychological dispositions, virtuous or
not, are only to be assessed by judgment of a person’s general character and observation
over more than single-act situations. If we act in accordance with reason and fulfil our
function as human beings, our behavior will generally reflect our virtuous personality traits
and dispositions.

Developing the Virtues

In a quote widely attributed to Aristotle, Will Durrant (1885–1981) sums up the
Aristotelian view by saying that “… we are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is
not an act but a habit”. It is fairly obvious that we cannot become excellent at something
overnight. Making progress in any endeavor is always a journey that requires both effort
and practice over time. Aristotle holds that the same is true for human beings attempting
to develop their virtuous character traits in attempt to live the good life. You may feel
yourself coming to an Aristotelian Virtue Ethical view after reading this chapter and
therefore be moved to become wittier, more courageous and more generous but you
cannot simply acquire these traits by decision; rather, you must live these traits in order
to develop them.
Cultivating a virtuous character is something that happens by practice. Aristotle
compares the development of the skill of virtue to the development of other skills. He says
that “… men become builders by building” and “… we become just by doing just acts”.
We might know that a brick must go into a particular place but we are good builders only
when we know how to place that brick properly. Building requires practical skill and not
merely intellectual knowledge and the same applies to developing virtuous character
traits. Ethical characters are developed by practical learning and habitual action and not
merely by intellectual teaching.
In the end, the virtuous individual will become comfortable in responding to
feelings/situations virtuously just as the good builder becomes comfortable responding to
the sight of various tools and a set of plans. A skilled builder will not need abstract
reflection when it comes to knowing how to build a wall properly, and nor will a skilled
cyclist need abstract reflection on how to balance his speed correctly as he goes around
a corner.
Analogously, a person skilled in the virtues will not need abstract reflection when
faced with a situation in which friendliness and generosity are possibilities; they will simply
know on a more intuitive level how to act. This is not to say that builders, cyclists and
virtuous people will not sometimes need to reflect specifically on what to do in abnormal
or difficult situations (e.g. moral dilemmas, in the case of ethics) but in normal situations
appropriate responses will be natural for those who are properly skilled.
It is the need to become skilled when developing virtuous character traits that leads
Aristotle to suggest that becoming virtuous will require a lifetime of work. Putting up a

10
single bookshelf does not make you a skilled builder any more than a single act of courage
makes you a courageous and virtuous person. It is the repetition of skill that determines
your status and the development of virtuous characters requires a lifetime of work rather
than a single week at a Virtue Ethics Bootcamp.

Evaluation:

I. Read the article below and answer the following question.

Sexual ethics is a study of a person’s sexuality and the manner by which human sexual
conduct must be exercised. There are many instances where sexual behavior must be observed
in order to properly nurture good interpersonal relationships. Thus, sexual ethics becomes a vital
subject that must be studied by everyone. One particular topic being discussed with sexual ethics
is the issue of pornography. Pornography is the explicit manifestation of sexual matters presented
in different forms of media. Pornography normally shows different illustrations of nudity and sexual
acts in print, videos, and social media outfit. Some people view pornography as immoral, citing
how it treats persons as mere sexual objects for pleasure. Some people, on the other hand, view
pornography as personal way of displaying one’s freedom of expression, which must be respected
by everyone. Perhaps, virtue ethics as a framework for moral evaluation, can be utilized in
assessing one’s sexual behavior specifically concerning the person’s fondness for pornography.

Questions:

1.What is your view on this?

____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
2.If virtue ethics aims for the development of the person’s good character, does watching
pornographic materials reflective of such character?
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

3.Is there a virtue that produced by behavior of patronizing pornography?

____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

11
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
4.What do you think will happen with regard to the character of a person if one habituates the
act of watching pornography?
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
5.Virtue ethics challenges the person to look at one’s habits concerning sexual behavior. What
would possibly be affected by such behavior is the person’s appreciation and valuation of
human relationship?
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

6. If we are not free to act can we still be morally responsible for our actions? How?
Justify your answer.
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
II. Discuss the possible implications (positive or negative) of the
patronage of pornography to the development of one’s character.
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________

12
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________

C. Answer and justify your answer based on the following scenario being given.

Scenario 1 Assume an out-of-control trolley car is hurtling down a street. Five people working
on the track are in its path and about to be killed. You can save five lives by pulling a lever that
will divert the trolley to an alternative track. Unfortunately, one worker is on the alternative track,
and pulling the lever would kill him. Is it ethical to pull the lever?
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

Scenario 2 Assume the one worker is a member of your family. Is it ethical to pull the
lever?
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________________________

Scenario 3 Assume that you are standing on a bridge when the runaway trolley takes aim at the
five people working on the track. Unfortunately, the only nearby heavy object, besides yourself,
is the stranger standing next to you. You are strong and throwing the stranger over the bridge
will stop the trolley. Is it ethical to throw the stranger in the path of the trolley?
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

13
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

Extension:

Direction: Answer or supply what is asked below.

I learned that
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

I was particularly interested in the

____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

I want to learn more

about________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________

14
References:

Oscar G. Bulaong Jr., M. J. (2018). Ethics: Foundation of Moral Valuation. Manila,

Philippines: Rex Book Store.
http://sacred-texts.com/cla/ari/nico/index.htm
https://us.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upmassets/90084_book_item_90084

15