LESSON XII: FRAMEWORKS AND PRINCIPLES BEHIND MORAL FRAMEWORKS

ABSTRACTION
An ethical framework is a set of codes that an individual use to guide his or her behavior. It is just
another term for “moral standards" as discussed in the early part of this text. It is what people use to
distinguish right from wrong in the way they interact with the world. It is used to determine the moral object of
an action. An ethical framework guides an individual in answering these two questions: “What do I ought to
do?” and Why do I ought to do so"? So ethical frameworks serve as guideposts in moral life.

The various dominant mental frames may be classified as follows:

1)virtue or character ethics of Aristotle,2) natural law or commandment ethics of St. Thomas and others,3)
deontogical and duty framework of Immanuel Kant,4) utilitarianist, teleological and consequentialist approach
and 5) Love and justice framework. They will be introduced here but will be discussed more in detail in the
succeeding lessons.

Virtue or Character Ethics of Aristotle

Virtue ethics asks, who is the ethical person? For Aristotle, the ethical person is virtuous, one who has
developed good character or has developed virtues. One attains virtues when he/she actualizes his/her
potentials or possibilities, the highest of which is happiness. Happiness is the joy of self-realization, self-
fulfillment, the experience of having actualized one's potentials.

Natural Law or Commandment Ethics of St. Thomas

For St. Thomas, what is right is what follows the natural law, the rule which says, “do good and avoid
evil. "In knowing the good as distinguished from evil, one is guided by the Ten Commandments which is
summed up as loving God and one's fellowmen.

Deontological and Duty Framework of Immanuel Kant

Kant's framework is deon or duty or deontological framework. Deontology centers on “"the rights of
individuals and the intentions associated with particular behavior. equal respect. given to all persons." The
“deontological approach is based on universal principles such as honesty, fairness, justice and respect for
persons and property." It is based on the categorical imperative, that is, one must act such that his/her maxim
will be the maxim of all. This acting based on a maxim that can be the maxim of all is a duty, an obligation of
every man or woman. Acting out of duty (deon) is acting out of good will or intentions. Treating man as an end;
not a means to an end is acting with good will or intentions.

Utilitarianist,Teleological and Consequentialist Framework

The utilitarianist teleological approach focuses on consequences, “The decision maker is concerned
with the utility of decision. What really counts is the net balance of good consequences over bad." The
rightness of an
action depends on the said net balance of good consequences.

Love and Justice Framework

What is ethical is that which is just and that which is loving. Justice giving what is due to others
(justice)while is giving even more than what is due to others.

ACTIVITY 1!
Instructions: Accomplish in a ¼ sheet of paper. Compose a cinquain describing the ethical person based on
any of the ethical frameworks. (Note: A cinquain is A 5-line poem that consists of the following:
Line 1: one word
Line 2: 2 words that describe line one
Line 3: 3 action words (-ing verbs_that relate to line 1)
Line 4: 4 words (feeling or a complete sentence) that relate to line
Line 5: 1 word. Synonym of line 1 or a word that sums it up
EXAMPLE:
Person
Just, loving
Thinking, deliberating, choosing
I am grateful he is
Ethical
ACTIVITY 2: Instructions: Write the letters of your answer at the back of your ¼ sheet of paper. Match the
items in Column 1 with Column 2. You may repeat an answer.
Column 1 Ethical Statements Column 2 Ethical Framework
1. The ethical person develops good character a. Virtue on Character Ethics of Aristotle
2. An act is ethical if one gives the other what he/she b. Natural Law or Commandment Ethics of St.
is due. Thomas
3. An act is ethical if it is an obligation expected of c. Deontogical and Duty Framework of Immanuel
every man or woman. Kant
4. That which is right follows the rule “do good and d. Utilitarian, Teleological and Consequentialist
avoid evil.”
 5. That which is ethical is that which has good e. Love and Justice Framework
consequences.
6. An act is ethical if one gives the other more than
what he is due.
7. To act ethically, one must act in a way that he
wishes others to act in the same way.
8. An act is ethical if it brings about the greatest good
for the greatest number of those affected by the act
9. What is good is written in a person’s very being.

LESSON XIII: ARISTOTLE’S VIRTUE ETHICS

ABSTRACTION
Virtue or character ethics
The following excerpts clarifies what virtue ethics is:
An ethical act is the action that a virtuous person would do in the same circumstances. Virtue ethics is
person-based rather than action-based. It looks at the virtue or moral character of the person carrying out an
action, rather than at ethical duties and rules or the consequences of particular actions.

Virtue ethics does not only deal with the rightness or wrongness of individual actions. It provides
guidance as to the sort of characteristics and behaviors a good person will seek to achieve. In that way, virtue
ethics is concerned with the whole of a person's life, rather than particular episodes or actions. A good person
is someone who lives virtuously-who possesses and lives the virtues.

Virtue ethics uses the following as a framework for ethical decision making. This is how it is done:
In the virtue framework, we try to identify the character
traits (either positive or negative) that might motivate us in a
given situation. We are concerned with what kind of person we
should be and what our actions indicate about our character. We
define ethical behavior as whatever a virtuous person would do in
the situation, and we seek to develop similar virtues.
Obviously, this framework is useful.in situations that ask
what sort of person one should be. As a way of making sense of
the world, it allows for a wide range of behaviors to be called
ethical, as there might be many different types of good character
and many paths to developing it. Consequently, it takes into
account all parts of human experience and their role in ethical
deliberation, as it believes that all of one’s experiences, emotions,
and thoughts can influence the development of one’s character.

Stated similarly, virtue ethics is “the ethics of behavior” which "focuses on the character of the persons
involved in the decision or action. If the person in question has good character, and genuine motivation and
intentions, he or she is behaving ethically." The rightness or wrongness of one's action, or the goodness or
badness of one's personality depends on his character, motivations and intentions.

Virtue ethics, “is an ethics whose goal is to determine what is essential to being a well-functioning or flourishing
human person. Virtue ethics stresses an ideal for humans or persons. As an ethics of ideals or excellences, it
is an optimistic and positive type of ethics."

Basic Types of Virtue(Excellence)

Aristotle gave two types of virtue. These are 1) intellectual virtues and 2) moral virtues. Intellectual
virtues refer to excellence of the mind while moral virtues refer to a person's dispositions to act well. Intellectual
virtues include ability to understand, reason and judge well while moral virtues dispose a person to act well.
In the context of Aristotle, virtue is an attained, actualized or self. realized potential or possibility. It can
serve as a moral framework. When one has the potential or possibility of becoming a musician, he tries to train
and study to become a musician following a musician's virtue as a framework

Aristotle (384-323 BC) posited an ethical system that may be termed "self realizationism.” In Aristotle's view,
when a person acts in accordance with his nature and realizes his full potential, he will do good and be
content. At birth, a baby is not a person, but a potential person. To become a "real" person, the child's inherent
potential must be realized. Unhappiness and frustration are caused by the unrealized potential of a person,
leading to failed goals and a poor life. Aristotle said, “Nature does nothing in vain." Therefore, it is imperative
for people to act in accordance with their nature and develop their latent talents in order to be content and
complete. happiness was held to be the ultimate goal. All other things, such as civic life or wealth, are merely
means to the end. Self-realization, the awareness of one's nature and the development of one’s talents, is the
surest path to happiness.
The material world is in state of actualizing, realizing what it is potential for. Everything has its potency for
something, its nature. Nature unfolds naturally, it has no obligation to be so. It has no intellect and will. But a
person has an obligation to be what he/she is meant or in potency to be. It his/her obligation to develop his/her
talent and virtues. The highest good or end, telos, of a person is the fullness of his/her self-development or
actualization. The concomitant result of this development or actualization of his/her potentials is what Aristotle
termed as happiness or the experience of happiness. In short, virtue means excellence and virtue ethics is
excellence ethics.

Virtue as a Mean
For Aristotle, virtue is the Golden Mean between two extremes The virtue of courage is a mean
between two extremes of deficiency and extreme, namely, cowardice and foolhardiness, respectively. Too little
courage is cowardice and 1oo much courage is foolhardiness (MacKinnon, et al 2015)

Virtue Ethics in Other Traditions

Confucius emphasized two virtues, jen (or ren) and li, Jen means humaneness, human-heartedness
and compassion. Li means propriety manners or culture.
Hinduism emphasizes five basic moral virtues: non-violence, truthfulness, honesty, chastity, freedom
from greed. It also emphasizes mental virtues: calmness, self-control, self-settledness, forbearance, faith and
complete concentration, hunger for spiritual liberation. (George,V, 2008)
Buddhism also has its intellectual and moral virtues. From the eight- fold path are the intellectual virtues
of right understanding and right mindfulness and the moral virtues of right speech, right action and right
livelihood.
Jesus Christ preached the virtues of love, mercy and compassion, hunger for justice, patience,
kindness, gentleness, self-control. St. Thomas Aquinas taught the theological virtues-faith, hope and love.
Christian tradition teaches four cardinal moral virtues, namely: prudence, justice, temperance and fortitude.
St. Thomas being an eclectic philosopher, integrated into his own philosophy anything that is good
conceived by his predecessors like Aristotle. But he enriched their thoughts with his own insights or learning.
The attainment of the highest good, which is happiness, includes its diffusion. “Bonum difusivum est.”
Goodness as goodness necessarily diffuses itself. A person's virtue diffuses itself in a right action. Goodness
shares itself, like a light that shines before all men.
One more point regarding various potentials of man which when actualized becomes virtues is Hans
George Gadamer's re-interpretation of Aristotle definition of man as a "homo logos," a speaking animal. In
other words, in the light Aristotle's wisdom, the virtue of being man is being a speaking animal, meaning, his
attainment of a meaningful, refined, and civilized language. Gutter language is vice; beautiful, meaningful and
refined language is virtue. One who has a virtue of a refined language speaks rightfully.
The virtuous person did not inherit his/her virtues. Neither were these virtues simply passed on to him
automatically. His being a person of virtue is a product of deliberate, consistent, continuous choice and
practice of living the virtue or virtues.

Questions Raised About Virtue Ethics

Here are some questions raised about virtue ethics:
1)How do we determine which traits are virtues and whether they are virtues in all circumstances. Are the
virtues for the Christian culture the same with those of the Muslim, Buddhist and Hindu cultures?

2) Mac Intyre, a contemporary philosopher, believes that virtues depend at least partly on the culture of
society. A warlike society will value heroic virtues whereas a peaceful society may think of generosity as a
more important virtue.

3) Who is more courageous-the person who wants to run away but does not or that one who does not even
want to run away? This has something to do with the degree of effort and discipline required to be virtuous.

ACTIVITY! Write your answer in a 1 whole sheet of paper.

1. The ethical person is a person of virtues. Describe this person of virtue based on:
a. Aristotle
b. Confucius
c. Hindu
d. Buddhist
e. Christian
f. Gadamer

LESSON XIV: St. Thomas’ Natural Law Ethics

Meaning of Natural law and Other Laws
Based on the phrase “natural law ethics,” what is ethical is what the natural law says. What is natural
law? Natural law is the “ordinance of Divine Wisdom, which is made known to us by reason and which requires
the observance of the moral order.” It may also be defined to be "The eternal law as far as it made known by
human reason. “By the eternal law we mean all that God necessarily decrees from eternity. That part of the
eternal law which reason reveals as directive of human acts, we call the natural law....
 Eternal law is what God wills for creation. We are part of God's creation and so we are part of Gods
eternal law. We may not be able to understand the eternal law fully given our limitations. However, by reason
we have a grasp or a sense of the eternal law. This is natural law.
St. Thomas Aquinas wrote:
There is in man an inclination to good, according to the nature of his reason, which nature is proper to him;
thus man has a natural inclination to know the truth about God, and to live in society; and in this respect,
whatever pertains to this inclination belongs to the natural law; for instance, to shun ignorance, to avoid
offending those among whom one has to live, and other such things regarding the above inclination. (Summa
Theologiael-2 Question 94, Article 2)

Let us relate natural law to other kinds of law: Rev.Charles Coppens,S.J. explains the various kinds of law
according to St.Thomas:

A law decreed by Almighty God is a divine law; one established by man is a human law. Those laws for human
conduct which God, having once decreed creation, necessarily enacts in accordance with that decree,
constitute the natural law; those which God or man freely enacts are positive laws. Now, between the natural
law and positive laws, there are these four points of difference: 1. The natural law, unlike positive laws, does
not depend upon the free will of God; its requirements flow from the intrinsic difference between right and
wrong, which is determined by the very essences of things. Hence, under this law, certain acts are not evil
primarily because they are forbidden, but they are forbidden because in themselves they are evil.2.
Consequently, the natural law is the same at all time, in all places, and for all persons; but this is not true of
positive laws, which may be changed with changing circumstances, or, if the law-giver so wills it, even without
change of circumstances. 3.The natural law emanates from God alone; but positive laws may be enacted by
men. 4.The natural law is promulgated through the light of reason; positive laws require for their promulgation
a sign external to man.

In summary, we have an eternal law, God’s law for the whole creation, which we cannot fully grasp given our
limitation. But with our gift of reason we have a grasp of that eternal law, that is natural law. Divine law is
decreed by God while human law is decreed by man.

Natural Law as a Universal Formula

As an ethical framework, the natural law or maxim may be applied as implicitly illustrated in the following:

A universal formula which contains in brief an expression of the whole natural law is this: “Keep the moral
order," or "Observe right order in your actions.” Some writers state it simply as, “Do good and avoid evil.” Now,
the right order of human acts consists evidently in their proper direction to man 's last end, which is,
subjectively, his perfect beatitude and, objectively, God Himself: God must direct His free creatures to their last
end, hence He commands them to observe the moral order and forbids them to depart from it.

So what is natural and ethical for a human person is to “keep the moral order, to "observe right order,”
to “do good and avoid evil" to preserve his/ her being. Suicide and murder work against preservation of human
life, therefore, are a violation of the natural law.

St. Thomas Aquinas grounded the directedness of nature in God. All of creation is directed toward their
final end God, God Himself. To direct us to Himself, He gave the divine law. The divine law given to us in the
Ten Commandments of the Old Testament and the new commandment of “love God..."and "love your
neighbor." by Jesus Christ in the New Testament. and in the we were St. Thomas synthesized faith and
reason. He believed that natural law is part of the divine law, that the "natural law shares in the eternal law. "All
of creation is directed
Analogous to logical reasoning, it may be applied as follows: Premise: Stealing is immoral and an evil
to avoided. Second Premise: The act of taking someone’s property without his consent is stealing. Conclusion:
Therefore, the act of taking someone's property, which I actually intend to do, is immoral and an evil to be
avoided, which I should do avoid.

Law Defined
St. Thomas explained that the natura1 law is promulgated through the light of reason. Positive laws
require for their promulgation a sign external to man. Laws that are enacted are called positive laws. St.
Thomas defined law in general as “an ordinance of reason which is for the common good, and has been
promulgated by one having charge of the community.” For a law to be a law, it must have the four requisites,
namely, a) ordinance (order, command) of reason) for the common good) promulgation, and d) by one who
has charge of the community. Based on the definition, a1 unreasonable law is not law; a law that favors one to
the prejudice of another or does not equally protect all is not a law; a law that is not promulgated or published
or made known to all, is not a law; and a law that is enacted by unauthorized persons is not a law.

A law must be a product of reason not purely of emotion. When the heart rules the mind, we can be
highly unreasonable. A law is promulgated for the common good because we are meant to be social, we
belong to a community. A law that favors the male gender at the expense of the female gender cannot be a
law. A law must be promulgated by one whose primary task is to care for his/her people, the community. The
primary task of our lawmakers is to care for and protect their people by legislating laws for the common good.
The law must be made known or communicated to all people to ensure correct understanding and compliance.
A law that is promulgated does not take effect immediately. In the Philippines, laws take effect after fifteen
days-following the completion of the publication in the Official Gazette or a newspaper of general circulation
unless it is otherwise provided. (https:/batasnatin.com/law-libraray/civil-law/persons-and-family/82
effectiuitu-of-lauue html Dotriarod6 18 18)

ACTIVITY! Read these two laws. Does each law fulfill the definition of a law as given? COME UP WITH AN
ANALYSIS PAPER. YOUR VIEWPOINT SHOULD BE EXAMINED CLOSELY AGAINST ST. THOMAS'
DEFINITION OF A LAW. (1 whole sheet of paper)
1. Speed Limiter in Public Vehicles Republic Act 10916 or "An act requiring the mandatory installation of
speed limiter in public utility and certain types of vehicle'" will require all covered public transportation
vehicles to have a speed limiter: Vehicles without speed limiters before the passage of the law will have
to comply within 18 months after it takes effect. The absence of a speed limiter will not be allowed for
registration or be given a franchise permit, and the owners or operators for the vehicle will be fined with
P50,000. Meanwhile, the driver's license will be suspended for one month and the franchise permit for
three months for the first offense Sanctions for succeeding offenses will be license suspension for three
months and franchise suspension for six months on top of imposed fines at the second offense; and
revocation of license and franchise suspension for at least a year, and an imposed fine for the third
offense. Offenders caught tampering with speed limiters will be imprisoned for six to 36 months and
fined with P30,000.
2. Anti-age discrimination for employees Republic Act 10911 or "An act prohibiting discrimination against
any individual in employment on account of age and providing penalties therefore" prohibits employers
from withholding promotion or deny training opportunities, compensation and privileges from employees
on the basis of age. Recruitment and employment agencies are also prohibited from refusing to help
individuals regardless of age from seeking employment and labor organizations are prohibited from
refusing employees of membership because of their age. Violators will be fined at least P50,000 but not
more than P500,000 and/or be imprisoned between three months to two years.

LESSON XV: KANT’S DEONTOLOGICAL ETHICS; THE DUTY FRAMEWORK

Kant's Ethics is now referred to as deontological. The term deontological has its root from the Greek
“"deon” which means “duty”. Hence deontological ethics focuses on "duty, obligation, and rights” instead of
consequences or ends. An act that proceeds from the will which wills it because it can be the will of all is a right
action. Willing and doing the will of all is a duty, regardless of the consequences. The following clarifies Kant's
duty-based approach:
The duty-based approach, sometimes called deontological ethics, argued that doing what is right is not about
the Consequences of our actions (something over which we ultimately have no control) but about having the
proper intention in performing the action, the ethical action is one taken from duty, that is, it is done precisely
because it is our obligation to perform the action. Ethical obligations are the same for all rational creatures
(they are universal), and knowledge of what these obligations entail is arrived at by discovering rules of
behavior that are not contradicted by reason.
Kant's famous formula for discovering our ethical duty is known as the "categorical imperative." It has a
number of different versions, but Kant believed they all amounted to the same imperative. The most basic form
of the imperatives: "Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should
become a universal law" So for example, lying is unethical because we could not universalize a maxim that
said “One should always lie.” Such a maxim would render all speeches meaningless. We can, however;
universalize the maxim, “Always speak truthfully,” without running into a logical contradiction. (Notice that the
duty- based approach says nothing about how easy or difficult it would be to carry out these maxims, only that
it is our duty as rational creatures to do so.) In acting according to a law that we have discovered to be rational
according to our own universal reason, we are acting autonomously (in a self- regulating fashion), and thus are
bound by duty, a duty we have given ourselves as rational creatures. We thus freely choose (we will) to bind
ourselves to the moral law. For Kant, choosing to obey the universal moral law is the very nature of acting
ethically. (Mackinon, B.and Fiola A.,2015)
The example, borrowing money with no intention to pay back cannot be universalized and therefore cannot be
ethical. If this becomes universalized, there will be no more lenders and all banks will close.
The Duty Framework
Correspondingly, the duty-based approach can be applied as a framework for ethical decision making:
In the Duty framework, we focus on the duties and obligations that we have in a given situation, and
consider what ethical obligations we have and what things we should never do. Ethical conduct is defined by
doing one's duties and doing the right thing, and the goal is performing the correct action. This framework has
 the advantage of creating a system of rules that has consistent expectations of all people; if an action is
ethically correct or a duty is required, il would apply to every person in a given situation. This even-
handedness encourages treating everyone with equal dignity and respect. This framework also focuses on
following moral rules or duty regardless of outcome, so it allows for the possibility that one might have acted
ethically, even if there is a bad result. Therefore, this framework works best in situations where there is a
sense of obligation or in those in which we need to consider why duty or obligation mandates or forbids certain
courses of action. However, this framework also has its limitations. First, it can appear cold and in personal, in
that it might require actions which are known to produce harms, even though they are strictly in keeping with a
particular moral rule. It also does not provide a way to determine which duty we should follow if we are
presented with a situation in which two or more duties conflict. It can also be rigid in applying the notion of duty
to everyone regardless of personal situation.

Kant's Theory of Right

According to Kant, the “universal principle of right” is that’ “an action is right if it can coexist with
everyone's freedom in accordance with a universal law, or if on its maxim the: freedom of choice of each can
coexist with everyone's freedom in accordance with a universal law” (6:230). In other words, your exercise
freely whatever rights you have on your property but only in accordance with universal law. Universal law
means a maxim that can be the maxim of all. You can use, dispose, enjoy its fruits, but only in such a way that
you do not violate the rights of others. This exercise of a right bearing in mind the obligation to respect the right
of other is tantamount to good faith or good will.

Legally and Morally Right

It appears that in Kant, what is legal must be at the same time moral. An action is legally right if it is at
the same time in accordance with universal law, that is, in accordance with the categorical imperative. In
another context, what is legal is not necessarily moral. For instance, what is legal is limited to compliance with
law, be it laws of a state or country; but being moral may not be just following the law, but doing more than
what the law requires like responding to the need of another. Paying an employee his minimum wage is legal;
but paying more than his minimum wage because of care and concern of his needs is more than what is legal.

Good Will
Kant says, “Nothing can possibly be conceived in the world, or even out of it, which can be called good
without qualification, except a good will. “Kant’s criteria or framework of what is right or wrong is "good will”, An
act is said to be right or wrong depending on whether it is done with or without-good will. The rightness or
wrongness of an action depends on one's good will or intentions. The usual criticism, or weakness cited,
regarding this concept is that” ‘The road to hell is paved with good intentions. “Is good will enough?
Categorical Imperative: To serve the will as a principle Kant has two (2) versions of the categorical
imperative. The first version states “I never to act other than so that I could will that my maxim should become
a universal law.” If one cannot wish or want that a certain rule or maxim becomes the maxim of all, that it is not
right to follow it. For instance, one cannot will that "thou shalt steal” becomes a rule to be followed by all
because others may ultimately and steal his property. One cannot wish that “killing “becomes the maxim of all
because he would not of course wish that someone will come to kill him.
The second version is as follows: “Always treat humanity, whether in your own person or that of another,
never simply as a means but always at the same time as an end. “Treating the another merely as a means to
an end means equating him to a mere instrument, a tool, an object which is cast aside after use, or can be sold
or exchanged when no longer needed, or has value only for as long as it is useful. Such act makes one a
"user." In contemporary philosophy, like Marcel or Buber's term, it is treating the other as an IT, a thing, that’s
why they call the act as'"thing-ization." In the parable of “Hope for the Flowers” by Trina Paulus,Stripe's
climbing the caterpillar's pillar to reach to top, where all that could be seen as a reward of. Climbing are other
caterpillar's pillars, was no other way than stepping on other caterpillars as a means of moving up higher.
Ought implies Can. This means that If and only if we 'can or are free to act in certain ways can we be
commanded to do so. This is one more moral principle ascribed to Kant, derived from two passages in his
works. One is stated as follows: “For if the moral law commands that we ought to be better human beings now,
it inescapably follows that we must be capable of being better human beings." Another one states as follows:
“The action to which the “ought" applies must indeed be possible under natural conditions." The Situation
Ethics author, Joseph Fletcher, used this maxim several times to illustrate his situationism. In full statement the
saying would be, “If I ought to do something, then I can do it.” By way of logical analysis, the statement means,
one’s ability to do something is a necessary condition for his being obliged to do it. In Fletcher's terms, “you are
obliged to do only what you can where you are.”
“I can “may also be interpreted to mean one's degree of freedom, if by freedom we understand as what
Hormedo said about it, “the autonomous energy of being. “Since the degree of one's freedom is the degree of
one's responsibility. Hormedo says, the stuff of freedom is energy or strength. It follows that the degree of
one's obligation is also the degree of one's freedom. One can no more be responsible than what he can
knowingly, freely, and voluntarily do.
ACTIVITY! 1whole sheet of paper
1. What is ethical is in accordance with first version of Kant's categorical imperative.
2. State it and illustrate with a concrete example. State the second version of Kant's categorical imperative.
Give a concrete example of using people.
LESSON XVI:UTILITARIANISM: THE CONSEQUENTIALIST ETHICAL FRAMEWORK
Origin and Nature of the Utilitarianist Framework
Two British philosophers, namely, Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, are known to be the original
advocates of utilitarianism, the former being considered the founder. Bentham (1789), described this moral
philosophy as follows:
Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for
them alone to point out what we ought to do...By the principle of utility is meant that principle which approves
or disapproves of every action whatsoever according to the tendency it appears to have to augment or diminish
the happiness of the party whose interest is in question: or, what is the same thing in other words to promote or
to oppose that happiness. I say of every action whatsoever, and therefore not only of every action of a private
individual, but of every measure of government.
Similarly, John Stuart (1861) Mill’s What Utilitarianism Is, opens with the following paragraph:
The creed which accepts as the foundation of morals "utility" or the "greatest happiness principle" holds that
actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of
happiness. By happiness is intended pleasure and the absence of pain; by unhappiness, pain and the privation
of pleasure.
In brief, utilitarianism as a moral principle is "the principle of utility or the greatest happiness principle."
It is also phrased as the principle of "the greatest good of the greatest number.” This is the quality (greatest
good) and quantity (greatest number) criteria. Among various options, that which is objectively good in quality
and most like by a majority is possibly the greatest good for the greatest number. An illustration may be the
passage of a minimum wage law. The quality of the law, its determination as the greatest good, the best
among other bills, is arrived through the debates and discussions in Congress. Once the best version of the
law is forged, it is put into a vote. The vote may reflect. Whether or not it will be accepted and will benefit the
greatest number. Utilitarianisms a “form of consequentialism," focusing “on the consequences of action. “in
contrast with deontology.
There are two versions, namely, act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. “Act utilitarianism: consider the
consequences of some particular act such as keeping or breaking one's promise." “Rule utilitarianism: consider
the consequences of some practice or rule behavior- for example, the practice of promise-keeping or promise-
breaking."(p 101) Whichever, whether act or practice of rule, if they produce good consequences, the act or
the practice of the rule would be right. Simply put, what is ethical according to the consequentialist
utilitarianism ethical framework? That which is ethical is that which gives pleasure and happiness as a
consequence. That is what the song “In heaven there is no beer; that’s why we drink beer here" implies. That
which is unethical is that which gives pain and unhappiness. That which is ethical is that which produces the
greatest good(happiness) for the greatest number.
The Consequentialist Framework
The following describes the application of the consequentialist framework:
In the Consequentialist framework, we focus on the future effects of the possible courses of action,
considering the people who will be directly or indirectly affected. We ask about what outcomes are desirable in
a given situation, and consider ethical conduct to be whatever will achieve the best consequences. The person
using the Consequences framework desires to produce the most good.
For Bentham and Mill, avoid pain, pursue pleasure. That is what it means to be ethical. What kind of pleasure
is morally preferred? Mill asserts intellectual pleasure. So it is not physical pleasure as expressed by the song
of the alcoholic "In heaven, there is no beer; that's why we drink beer here. "Mill wrote:
It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool
satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig is, of a different opinion, it is because they only know their own side of the
question. The other party to the comparison knows both sides. (Mill,1907)
ACTIVITY! 1 whole sheet of paper
2.Are all pains ethically bad? What about the pains of martyrdom andacts of heroism?
3.The utilitarianist advises us to avoid pain to be ethical.How can you reconcile this with Catholic and Muslim
tradition of fasting and abstinence? Are these not sources of discomfort and pain?