Basic Concepts in Ethics (Reading Material)

 

Title: Basic Concepts in Ethics

Overview: This module presents introductory discussions to prepare students for the study of ethics and morality. In this module, the students will be introduced to the definition of ethics, discussion of the concepts found in the definition of ethics such as philosophy and morality, key concepts and terminologies used in the study of ethics, the foundations, and requirements of morality that made it possible for the study of ethics to exist. This module also introduces moral dilemmas and its different types as they are very significant and are used often on the succeeding lessons. . Learning Lea rning Outcomes:  At the end of this module, module, the students are expected expected to: 1. Identify the key differences of Non-moral Standards from Moral Standards. 2. Analyze how reason and impartiality are regarded as minimum standards for morality. 3. Explain the role of Human Free Will in the study of morality.

Content:

What is Ethics? When one hears the term ethics, one immediately thinks that it is all about behaviors of a human person and it is all about what is right and what is wrong. This refers to both all the good things and deeds we should pursue and the bad things we should avoid as human persons. The word ethics came from the Greek word ‘ethos’  

which translates as “character” or “manners”; it is also translated as

“characteristic or habitual ways of doings things” in some other references. In this discussion, we will use the most concise and accurate definition of ethics as an academic discipline. Ethics is the branch of Philosophy which studies the morality of human actions. It is also called as Moral Philosophy and concerned with the rightness or wrongness of acts done by individuals and how are they considered right or wrong. Ethics refers to established standards or norms regarding good and bad or right and

 

wrong behavior that are recognized by the people in consonance with their religious beliefs and cultures. Let us briefly discuss the important concepts found in the definition of Ethics. First, it is a branch of Philosophy Philosophy.. As defined by Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas, two of the most significant thinkers in the whole history of philosophy, Philosophy is the science of all things through their ultimate causes, reasons, and principles acquired through the use of human reason alone. alone . Philosophy is mostly referred to as the “Love of Wisdom” since it seeks the highest/ultimate reasons and causes caus es for the existence of anything. Unlike other academic disciplines which have their own specific concerns and focus only on their specific concerns, Philosophy seeks to know the ultimate truth about everything. Meaning to say, anything can be a subject for the study of Philosophy and that no other instruments, devices, or apparatuses are being used except the human person’s capacity to think, understand, reflect, and to reason out. When you think hard about something and its reasons and purposes, it is already philosophizing. Second, Ethics is a study about morality morality.. When talking about the term morality, you may also think that this refers to what is wrong and what is right. How is it distinct from Ethics? Morality may refer to the quality of an action as either good or bad; hence we call an action immoral if it is bad and moral if it is good according to our standards. It also refers to the code or system of behaviors that are considered acceptable and unacceptable to a community that is based on personal beliefs or communal traditions which is not formally presented or imposed to the community. Meaning to say, morality is almost the same with ethics. In fact, in some other references they are used interchangeably. The difference is that ethics is an established set of norms/standards and an academic discipline itself while morality is the moral quality of an action and at the same time a standard regarding good and bad which is personal or subjective. Lastly, ethics is concerned with human acts. acts . Being focused with the morality of human actions, it is necessary to clarify what these actions are. In the study of ethics, actions are classified into two: human acts and acts of man. Acts of man are acts done by a human person that no longer requires will, intention, and knowledge. These acts are done spontaneously as they are actions natural to a human person or non-related to

 

morality or otherwise known as neutral acts or amoral acts. These actions include walking in a shopping mall, eating lunch, brushing your teeth, and doing laundry. These acts do not belong to a person’s idea of morally right and morally wrong. On the other hand, human acts are the exact opposite of acts of man as the former requires intentions and knowledge about the morality of the act to be performed and its consequences. Human acts are done voluntarily with awareness about the nature of an action whether it is naturally good or bad. Acts such as helping other people by giving money to the needy even if you yourself is in need but because you think it is a good and right thing to do is an example of a moral act. Killing a person whom you hate so much even if you know that it is wrong and you would end up in prison but still you do it is another example of a human act. Since human acts include deliberate use of knowledge and will, these make such acts to be subjected to the study of ethics as they are the result of the choices and reason of a person.

Moral Vs. Non-Moral Norms

The study of Ethics offers a number of different norms or standards which are called ethical/moral frameworks that serve as the basis for the morality of an action. These norms are either imposed or presented by the sources of authority to the people in the society. These sources of authority are seen by the people as legitimate sources of morality because whatever they present or contain is believed and practiced by the people almost without even questioning them. These sources of authority may refer to religion, law, and culture as they are some of the most seemingly sources of right and wrong behaviors for most people. Standards and norms presented by these sources of authority dictates what is good and what is bad in the society. But not all that is presented or dictated by the sources of authority in a society is moral. The terms ‘good’ and ‘bad’ are analogous, which means that they can mean differently as applied to different things or actions. For example, a person can say that a song s/he heard was was a ‘good’ song since it touches his/her heart and can relate with the lyrics of the song. Another example is that one can

 

say that LeBron James is a very ‘good’ basketball player since he plays well and can carry a team to the championships. Or one can say s ay that a movie is ‘bad’ because it has low quality animations or editing. The previous examples show the value of the words good and bad as something that is not connected with morality or ethics. These standards of what is good and bad and are not related with morality are called non-moral standards. Non-moral standards refer to norms of fashion, mechanics of a game or sport, some house rules and rules of public institutions, and some laws. In short, non-moral norms refer to human acts or actions that are not related to morality or that cannot be morally and ethically judged as right or wrong. Even if you violate some some rules or standards of the examples mentioned above, you will not be called an immoral person. For example, a person playing basketball without dribbling the ball is not immoral, if you wear clothes that are not part of the trend; you are not an immoral person. Moral Norms, however, refer to standards categorizing human acts as either moral or immoral. These are the actions that can be ethically or morally judged as either right or wrong as they are related to our ideas of what is ideally and morally good behaviors for a human person as a part of society and as an individual.

How are moral standards different from non-moral standards?

1. Moral Standards Standards includ e actio actio ns that will g reatly reatly affect the well-being of a person. -  Actions that have direct or indirect effects to another person or to one’s self that will cause either significant benefit and joy or serious injury, sadness, and anger for a long period of time.

2. Moral Standards Standards tend to or ought to out-weigh other norms and standards. standards. -

Actions that we can consider good and the morally right thing to do even if for some other norms those same actions are considered wrong. Such as giving

 

alms to the poor even if your country deems it illegal because you think it is a moral thing to do.

3. Moral Standards Standards come from the immediate judgment of a pe person rson and not  ju  just st dict di ct ated by so urces ur ces of aut autho ho ri ty. ty . -

Moral

actions

can

come

from

an

individual’s

own

perception

and

understanding of good and bad even without the guidance the sources of authority such as the religion, the law, and the culture of a person.

4. Moral Standards can be agreed universall uni versall y. -

The idea and judgment regarding what is morally right and wrong does not only exist in just one specific group of people. There are some actions that people with different race, religion, culture and belief would agree that are right or wrong. Killing is universally regarded as wrong and respecting one’s parents is also universally regarded as good.

5. Moral Standards Standards are based from im partiality. -

Actions we regard as morally right and morally wrong remains the same regardless of the persons who do those actions. Being impartial means that our judgments are not biased and are absolute.  absolute. 

Foundations of Morality  A. Freedom

The human person is endowed with free will as part of his rational soul which enables him to choose and do whatever he wills and think. Because of this free will, a person becomes autonomous or is capable of deciding for himself whichever course of action to take in response to a given situation. But freedom does not consist only of deciding to do things which please the person doing the act. Freedom should be understood as the capacity of doing anything or any act which is morally good.

 

 

Without the existence of free will in a human person, there can be no study of

morality or ethics itself because freedom is important in judging or determining the morality an action of a person. There is no point in judging a person for his acts if that person has no control to his body just like a computer or a robot that does only what is commanded to it and is not even aware that he did a certain thing. That is why we cannot judge animals for their murderous acts towards fellow animals or to some people because they do not have rationality and freedom; they are just governed by their instincts, but not human persons.

The rational soul of the human person enables a person to become aware of what is acceptable and what is not, what is good and what is bad. It also enables a person to will things that may they be good or bad. Since a person is knowledgeable and is aware of what is good and bad, it is up to his freedom if he will choose to do bad things despite his knowledge of it. Ethics is concerned with human acts, and human acts require knowledge and will, and this ‘will’ gives a person freedom which is a requirement in studying the morality of an act. Hence the existence of human freedom is an indispensable factor and requirement for judging actions in Ethics.

B. Responsibility

It is stated above that freedom is a foundation of morality and that it comes from the free will of the rational soul of a human being. Freedom gives the capacity to choose whatever one person wills or wants. But it does not end in just choosing what action to take. Imagine a person that intends nothing but to help out of good will and ends up messing up or having unexpected negative results for the one this person intends to help. Will this person just be acquitted from his/her acts? Can s/he just say s/he just wanted to help and be justified? A person cannot just do anything s/he wills because s/he has freedom. In every action, there are always consequences. A person is

 

accountable and responsible for every action s/he takes. A person is always ought to do what is morally good.

Minimum Requirements for Morality

Reason

The first requirement for morality is reason. In order for one to be called moral, s/he should be a rational being first, and being a rational being means having the capacity to reason out and to grasp knowledge. Without reason, a person cannot be moral since being irrational would render a person to lack the capacity to reason out and understand things; and that means this being that lacks the capacity to reason and to grasp knowledge does not have the slightest idea of how is it to be moral or know the word moral itself. That is why we say ‘only humans can be moral beings’ since animals lack the capacity to reason out and we do not sue or file cases against these animals when they kill other animals or humans or when they steal food. We do not judge animals as morally good or morally bad because they simply lack reason and they are  just guided guided by their their instincts instincts to survive. survive. Unlike animals, human persons are rational. Humans possess knowledge of what is moral and immoral. Given these propositions, people come to know what makes their actions moral or immoral. Reason helps people to understand and to justify actions they see and do in the society. It should be reason to be the guide and drive of every people in their actions not just only instincts or feelings.

Impartiality

The second requirement for morality is impartiality. This pertains to an individual’s judgment of an action without any bias and prejudice. This refers to becoming objective of using one’s reason in judging the morality of an action or of an individual. Before a person to be called moral, his/her actions must be based on

 

impartial considerations, not giving or showing any favors upon judging other’s actions. For example, a teacher has two students who had a fight; one of the students is the teacher’s nephew. nephew. When the teacher asked the students their reasons for fighting, the teacher did not show any biases or favoritism between the two and made appropriate actions regarding the matter. This is an example of impartiality. Being objective and disregarding biases and preferences is a requirement for being moral.

Moral Dilemmas

In studying ethics, a person delving into the morality or immorality of a human act will often encounter dilemmas such as in case analysis which are frequently encountered in the study of morality. Basically, dilemmas are instances wherein a person or a group is confronted by a problem that requires courses of action that are contradicting with each other and that produce different results; such as a group of students preparing to make a research. These students, upon brainstorming, might argue what to research about considering many factors and might ended up unable to decide. This is an example of a dilemma, is it a moral one? Or not?

 A moral dilemma is almost almost the same thing with with a dilemma, it is also a situation or an instance wherein a person or a group is presented with a problem and that a difficult choice has to be made between or among two or more courses of action. The only thing that might be the only difference of a moral dilemma to a non-moral dilemma is that among the choices to answer the dilemma, each of them entails violating a moral principle. In its simplest sense, moral dilemmas are conflicts between moral principles.

For example, a family is in a dilemma where a family member is in a hospital, incurable, and is attached with life support, without this life support this family member is sure to die. The family’s resources are nearly running out and might endanger the whole family as their bill in the hospital is growing. They are left with the question how far can they go? Will they exhaust their resources even if their patient is incurable or shall they give up the life support to preserve the well-being of the family? If they give

 

up the life support, they will transgress trans gress the moral principle of “killing/mercy killing is immoral”. If they don’t give up, they will transgress the principle of “well -being of the many”.   many”. The common thing between moral and non-moral dilemmas is that they both have conflicts. A person in a moral dilemma sees that s/he has the reasons to do either of the courses of action but it is not possible to do both. These are the features of a moral dilemma: (a) a person is ought to perform a solution to a dilemma; (b) a person can perform either of the choices to solve the dilemma but cannot do them both; (c) a person, no matter what course of action s/he chooses, will fulfill a moral principle and transgress another moral principle at the same time just like the example above.

Three Levels of Moral Dilemma  Dilemma 

 A. Personal Dilemmas In this level, dilemmas are experienced by a single person and are resolved by this person alone who is experiencing the dilemma. This means that a person will not depend on a collective decision but will depend of his/her own moral reasoning guided by the moral principle s/he is following or believing.  An example of a personal personal moral dilemma is the famous ‘trolley problem’ where five people were tied on a railway track and one person on another track. A trolley or a train is rushing towards the five people and you find yourself in front of a lever to decide where the train will go. Will you choose to save the five people or the one person?

B. Organizational Dilemmas In this level, dilemmas are experienced by people who belong to the same group or organization. The dilemma experienced in this level requires a collective decision of all the members of the organization or majority of the members at least. This does not depend on a decision made by a single person in the organization. This dilemma is more difficult than the first level as it requires more people to respond to a problem. This

 

might mean that there would be more conflict in the organization in coming up with the solution compared when there is only one person to choose a course of action.

C. Structural Dilemmas In this level, dilemmas are experienced by two or more organizations. This dilemma involves more than just an organization but two or more of them to answer a certain problem. It may pertain to a national or international concern or matter, concern of a province with many cities or municipalities, concern of a city with many barangays. This might be the most difficult level among the three since it requires collective decision of organizations and institutions. Compared to the organizational dilemma, this needs organizations to settle first before they can present their solution to other organizations involved in the dilemma.

Important Keywords: 1. Philosophy Philosophy    –   –  The science/knowledge of all things through their ultimate reasons, causes, and principles acquired through use of human reason alone. 2. Ethics Ethics  - The branch of philosophy that studies the morality of human actions. 3. Morality Morality   - The code or system of behaviors that are considered acceptable or unacceptable to a community that is based on personal beliefs or communal traditions which is not formally presented or imposed to the community. 4. Human Acts – Acts  – These  These are acts of human persons that are done with knowledge, will, and intention. 5. Moral Moral   –  –   the quality of an action being good or acceptable, the quality of being subject of morality 6. Non-moral Non-moral  – the  – the quality of not being subject to morality, not related to morality. 7. Freedom Freedom  – the  – the capacity of doing anything that is morally good. 8. Moral Dilemma  Dilemma  - a situation or an instance wherein a person or a group is presented with a problem and that a difficult choice has to be made between or among two or more courses of action. Conflict between moral principles.