Synthesis-Making-Informed-Decisions.pdfsnns
- 2. Objectives Identify Identify the different factors that shape an individual in her moral decision-making; Internalize Internalize the necessary steps forward making informed moral decisions; and Apply Apply the ethical theories or framework on moral issues involving the self, society, and the non- human environment.
- 3. Recap Four major ethical theories or framewor ks: Utilitarianism, Natural law ethics, Kantian deontology, and Virtue Ethics.
- 4. Recap None of the major ethical theories are definitive nor final. Each represents the best attempts of the best thinkers in history. What ought to do? What ought I to do so?
- 5. Recap •The story of humanity is a never-ending search for what it means to be fully human in the face of moral choices.
- 6. Introduction Several notions will be clarified in this lesson: 1. Questions on what the right thing to do is and why are questions that all human beings – regardless of race, age, socioeconomic class, gender, culture, educational attainment, religious affiliation, or political association – will have to ask at one point or another in their lives; 2. Neither the laws nor rules of one’s immediate community or of wider culture or of religious affiliation can sufficiently answer these questions, especially when different duties, cultures, or religions intersect and conflict; 3. Reason has a role to play in addressing these questions, if not in resolving them.
- 7. Reason It is the power that identifies the situations in which rules and principles sometimes conflict with one another. Reason, hopefully, will allow one to finally make the best decision possible in a given situation of moral choice.
- 8. Capacities of Reason It enable us to distinguish between human situations that have a genuinely moral character from those that are non-moral (or amoral). It shows us that aesthetic considerations and questions of etiquette are important facets of human life, but they do not necessarily translate into genuine ethical or moral value. Reason reminds us that the distinctions are not always easy to identify nor explain.
- 9. Ethical and Moral Dimension qualitatively weightier than aesthetic or of etiquette MISTAKES IN AESTHETICS OR IN ETIQUETTE CAN BE FROWNED UPON BY MEMBERS OF ONE HUMAN SOCIETY BUT NEED NOT MERIT THE SEVEREST OF PUNISHMENTS OR PENALTY. REASON, THROUGH PROPER PHILOSOPHIZING, WILL AID AN INDIVIDUAL TO MAKE SUCH POTENTIALLY CRUCIAL DISTINCTIONS.
- 10. Personal Level of Moral Valuation Ethics teaches us that moral valuation can happen in the level of the personal, the societal (both local and global), and in relation to the physical environment. Personal can be understood to mean both the person in relation to herself, as well as her relation to other human beings on an intimate or person-to-person basis. Ethics is clearly concerned with the right way to act in relation to other human beings and toward self.
- 11. Ethics as Guide How she takes care of herself versus how she treats herself badly (e.g., substance abuse, suicide, etc.) is a question of ethical value that is concerned mainly with her own person. Personal refers to a person’s intimate relationships with other people like her parents, siblings, children, friends, or other close acquaintances. For most people, it is clear enough that there are right and wrong ways to deal with these familiar contacts. Ethics can help us navigate what those ways can be.
- 12. Societal level of moral valuation Society means one’s immediate community (one’s neighborhood, barangay, or town), the larger sphere (one’s province, region, or country), or the whole global village defined as the interconnection of the different nations of the world. One must be aware that there are many aspects to social life, all of which may come into play when one needs to make a decision in a moral situation. All levels of society involve some kind of culture, which may be loosely described as the way of life of a particular community of people at a given period of time.
- 13. Societal level of moral valuation Culture is a broad term: it may include the beliefs and practices a certain group of people considered valuable and can extend to such realms as art (e.g., music, literature, performance, and so on), laws (e.g., injunctions against taboo practices), fields of knowledge (e.g., scientific, technological, and medical beliefs and practices at a given point in time), and customs of a community (e.g., the aforementioned rules of etiquette). Ethics serve to guide one through the potentially confusing thicket of an individual’s interaction with her wider world of social roles, which can come into conflict with one another or even with her own system of values.
- 14. Goal •Applying rational deliberation to determine a person’s ethical responsibility to herself, society, and environment is the overall goal of a college course in Ethics.
- 16. The moral agent and context Moral agent – the one who eventually must think about her choices and make decisions on what she ought to do. The one who is tasked to think about what is “right” and why it is so, and to choose to do so, is a human individual.
- 17. Individual Engage in ethical though and decision- making Who one is Ancient Greeks - “Epimeleia he auto” – meaning “Know thyself”
- 18. Ramon Castillo Reyes (1935-2014) Born in 1935 in the Philippines Earned his Bachelor of Arts degree in Ateneo de Manila University in Quezon City in 1956 Obtain his PhD in Philosophy from the Universite Catholique de Louvain in Belgium in 1965 Teacher in the Department of Philosophy of Ateneo de Manila University from 1965 to 2013. One of the pioneers in the Philippines of the philosophical approach known as existential phenomenology. Published book in 1988 “Ground and Norm of Morality: Ethics for College Students” Died in 2014
- 19. Moral Agent Ramon C. Reyes in his essay “Man and Historical Action” explained that “Who one is” is a cross-point. By this he means that one’s identity, who one is or who I am, is a product of many forces and events that happened outside of one’s choosing.
- 20. Reyes four cross-points THE PHYSICAL THE INTERPERSONAL THE SOCIAL THE HISTORICAL
- 21. Physical Who one is, is a function of physical events in the past and material factors in the present that one did not have a choice in. You are a member of the species Homo Sapiens and therefore possess the capacities and limitations endemic to human beings everywhere. You inherited the genetic material of both your biological parents. Your body has been shaped and continues to be conditioned by the given set of environmental factors that are specific to your corner of the globe.
- 22. Physical All of these are given; they have happened or are still happening whether you want to or not. You did not choose to be a human being, nor to have this particular set of biological parents, nor to be born in and/or grow up in such a physical environment.
- 23. Interpersonal An individual is a product of an interpersonal cross-point of many events and factors outside of one’s choosing. One did not choose her own parents, and yet her personality, character traits and her overall way of doing things and thinking about things have all been shaped by the character of her parents and how they brought her up. All of these are also affected by the people surrounding her: siblings, relatives, classmates, playmates, and eventually workmates.
- 24. Interpersonal •Thus, who one is – in the sense of one’s character or personality – has been shaped by one’s relationships as well as the physical factors that affect how one thinks and feels.
- 25. Societal “Who one is” is shaped by one’s society. Society here pertains to all the elements of the human groups. “Culture” in its varied aspects is included here. Reyes argued that “Who one is” is molded in large part by the kind of society and culture – which, for the most part, one did not choose – that one belongs to.
- 26. Societal • Filipino have their own way of doing things (pagmamano), their own system of beliefs and values (closely-knit family ties), and even their own notions of right and wrong. • This cross-point interacts with the physical and the interpersonal factors that the individual and her people are immersed into or engaged in.
- 27. Historical Which is simply the events that one’s people has undergone. In short, one’s people’s history shapes “who one is” right now.
- 28. Historical Example: The Philippines had a long history of colonization that affected how Philippine society has been formed and how Philippine culture has developed. This effect, in turn, shapes the individual who is a member of Philippine society. A major part of Philippine history is the Christianization of the islands during the Spanish conquest. Christianity, for good or bad, has formed Philippine society and culture, and most probably the individual Filipino, whether she may be Christian herself or not.
- 29. Reyes 4Cross-point The historical cross-point interacts with the previous three. Each cross-point thus crosses over into the others as well.
- 30. Reyes 4Cross-point Being a product of all these cross-points is just one side of “Who one is”. “Who one is” is also a project for one’s self. This happen because a human individual has freedom. This freedom is not absolute: one does not become something because one chooses to be. This finite freedom means that one has the capacity to give herself a particular direction in life according to her own ideal self.
- 31. Oneself “Who one is” is a cross-point, but in an existential level, he argues that the meaning of one’s existence is in the intersection between the fact that one’s being is a product of many forces outside her choosing and her ideal future for herself. What one ought to do in one’s life is not dictated by one’s physical, interpersonal, social, or historical conditions. What one ought to do is also not abstracted from one’s own specific situation.
- 32. Oneself One always comes from somewhere One is always continuously being shaped by many factors outside of one’s own free will The human individual thus always exists in the tension between being conditioned by external factors and being a free agent. The human individual never exists in a vacuum as if she were a pure rational entity without any embodiment and historicity.
- 33. Essay Who are you as Filipino? Use Reyes' four cross- point in explaining. (Not less than 300 words). 10 points for each cross- point. Rubrics: Content: 8 points, Grammar: 2 points, Total: 10 points
- 35. CULTURE AND ETHICS •One culture dictates what is right or wrong of an individual.
- 36. CULTURE AND ETHICS • “WHEN IN ROME, DO AS THE ROMANS DO” ST. AMBROSE • This quote implies that one’s culture is inescapable, that is, one has to look into the standards of her society to resolve all her ethical questions with finality. • How he relates to herself, her close relations, her own society, with other societies, and with the natural world are all predetermined by her membership in her society and culture.
- 37. Culture and Ethics Example: Custom – having visitor (right or acceptable behavior) Before: We give snacks to our visitors a steam root crops, banana and sweet potato. Now: We give snacks to our visitors biscuits, pizza and coke. Example: Horoscope *Filipino: Some of us don’t believe in it. *Chinese: They believe in it. Note: Sometimes what is right to us, it is wrong to them or vice versa.
- 38. Culture and Ethics •Ability to understand a culture on its own terms and not to make judgement using the standards of one own culture.
- 39. CULTURAL RELATIVISM • American Philosopher James Rachels (1941-2003). • Rachels defines cultural relativism as the position that claims that there is no such thing as objective truth in the realm of morality. • The argument of this position is that since different cultures have different moral codes, then there is no one correct moral code that all cultures must follow. • The implication is that each culture has its own standard of right or wrong, its validity
- 40. Cultural Relativism •Rachel questions logic of this argument: first, that cultural relativism confuses a statement of fact (that different cultures have different moral codes), which is merely descriptive, with normative statement (that there cannot be objective truth in morality).
- 41. Cultural Relativism •Rachels provides a counter-argument by analogy: just because some believed that Earth was flat, while some believe it is spherical, it does not mean that there is no objective truth to the actual shape of the Earth.
- 42. Reductio ad absurdum argument •It is an argument which first assumes that the claim in question is correct, in order to show the absurdity that will ensure if the claim is accepted as such.
- 43. Absurd consequences of accepting the claim of cultural relativism 1. If cultural relativism was correct, then one cannot criticize the practice or beliefs of another culture anymore as long as that culture thinks as what it is doing is correct. 2. If cultural relativism was correct, then one cannot even criticize the practices or beliefs on one’s own culture. 3. If cultural relativism was correct, then one cannot even accept that moral progress can happened.
- 44. Culture • Rachels concludes his argument by saying that he understands the attractiveness of the idea of cultural relativism for many people, that is, it recognizes the differences between cultures. • However, he argues that recognizing and respecting differences between cultures do not necessarily mean that there is no such thing as objective truth in morality. • Cultures hold certain values in common. • The cultural differences between one society and another in terms of norms, practices, and beliefs are not trivial matters that one can disregard. • They are actually part of “who one is” and cannot be aside.
- 45. Challenge •The challenge of Ethics is not the removal of one’s culture because that is what makes one unique. •Instead, one must dig deeper into her own culture in order to discover how her own people have most meaningfully explored possibly universal human questions or problems within the particularity of her own people’s native ground.
- 46. Benefit •One can then benefit by paying attention to her own unique cultural heritage, because doing so may give her a glimpse into the profound ways her people have grappled with the question of “What ought I to do?”
- 47. Ethics and Culture • Ethics, should neither be reduced to one’s own cultural standards, nor should it simplistically dismiss one’s unique cultural beliefs and practices. • What is important is that one does not wander into ethical situations blindly, with the naïve assumption that ethical issues will be resolved automatically by her beliefs and traditions. • Instead, one must challenge herself to continuously work toward a fuller maturity in ethical decision-making.
- 48. Moral Development •Moral Development – is a prerequisite if the individual is to encounter ethical situations with a clear mind and with her values properly placed with respect to each other.
- 50. Religion and Ethics •Many people consider themselves “religious” assume that it is the teachings of their own religion that define what is truly “right” or “wrong,” “good” or “bad.” •There are many different religions in the world. •Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism are the four largest religious groups in the world at present, based on population.
- 51. Religion and Ethics • Predominantly Philippines, is Roman Catholic, yet many other religions continue to flourish in the archipelago. • Beyond all the differences, however, religion in essence represents a group’s ultimate, most fundamental concerns regarding their existence. • For followers of a particular religion, the ultimate meaning of their existence, as well as the existence of the whole of reality, is found in the beliefs of that religion.
- 52. Religion and Ethics •Many religious followers assume that what their religion teachers can be found either in their sacred scripture (e.g., the Bible for Christians, the Qur’an for Muslims, etc.) or body of writings (e.g., the Vedas, including the Upanishads, and other texts for Hindus; the Tao Te Ching, Chuang-tzu, and other Taoist classics for Taoists) or in other forms (other than written texts) of preaching that their leaders had promulgated and become part of their traditions.
- 53. Religion and Ethics • What exactly does sacred scripture (or religious teaching) command? • This is a question of interpretation since even the same passage from a particular religious tradition (e.g., “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” Genesis 21:24, can have many different interpretations from religious teachers even from within the same tradition.
- 54. Religion and Ethics • Reyes, concerning an individual’s cross-points, one can see that the reading or interpretation of a particular passage or text is the product of an individual’s embodiment and historicity and on the other hand, her existential ideal. • This does not mean that religious teaching is relative to the individual’s particular situation (implying no objective and universal truth about the matter) but that any reading or interpretation has a historical particularity affected by the situatedness of the reader.
- 55. Religion and Ethics •This implies that the moral agent in question must still, in full responsibility, challenge herself to understand using her own powers of rationality, but with full recognition of her own situatedness and what her religious authorities claim their religion teaches.
- 56. Religion and Ethics • One must determine what justifies the claim of a particular religious teaching when it commands its followers on what they “ought to do”. • When something is “morally good”, is it because it is good in itself and that is why God commands it, or is it good because God simply says so? • The problem is not that religion misleads people; the problem is that too many people perform heinous acts simply because they assumed they were following the teachings of their supposed religion, without stopping to think whether these actions are harmful.
- 57. Religion and Ethics •The Philosophical-minded individual therefore is tasked to be critical even of her own set of beliefs and practices and to not simply follow for the sake of blind obedience.
- 59. Moral Deliberation •Lawrence Kohlberg – American Moral Psychologist •Theorized that moral development happens in six stages, which he divide into three levels. •1. Pre-conventional •2. Conventional •3. Post-conventional
- 60. Pre-conventional •This corresponds to how infants and young children think. •This pre-conventional level, whose reasoning is centered on the consequences of one’s actions, is divided into two stages.
- 61. Pre-conventional •First stage is centered around obedience and the avoidance of punishment: to a young child’s mind, an action is “good” if it enables one to escape from punishment; “bad” if it leads to punishment. •Second stage is when a child learns to act according to what she thinks will serve her self- interest; thus, what is “good” at this age is what the child thinks can bring her pleasure.
- 62. Pre-conventional •Pre-conventional = pain (punishment) or pleasure (reward) •The concentration is one herself and what she can feel, instead of her society’s conventions on what is right or wrong.
- 63. Conventional •Age in which older children, adolescents, and young adults learn to conform to the expectations of society. •This second level is divided into two stages: the 3rd and 4th stages of moral development.
- 64. Conventional •Third stage is when one begins to act according to what the larger group, she belongs to expects of her. The individual her assumes that what will benefit her best is when the other members of her group approve of her actions. The general tendency was to conform first to the values of one’s immediate group, such as her family, playmates, or later on barkada.
- 65. Conventional •Fourth stage is achieved when a person realizes that following the dictates of her society is not just good for herself but more importantly, it is necessary for the existence of society itself. The individual at this stage values most the laws, rules, and regulations of her society, and thus her moral reasoning is shaped by dutifulness to the external standards set by society.
- 66. Kohlberg’s theory •Is a psychological theory that attempts to describe the stages of a person’s growth in moral thinking. •For him, morally mature individual must outgrow both the (1) preconventional level and the (2) conventional level.
- 67. Post-conventional •Morally responsible agent recognizes that what is good, or right is not reducible to following the rules of one’s group. •Instead, it is a question of understanding personally what one ought to do and deciding, using one’s free will, to act accordingly.
- 68. Post-conventional •This level is divided into two stages (the fifth and sixth), represents the individual’s realization that the ethical principles she has rationally arrived at take precedence over even the rules or conventions that her society dictates.
- 69. Post-conventional •Moral maturity therefore is seen in an agent who acts on what she has understood, using her full rationality, to be what is right, regardless of whether the act will bring the agent pleasure or pain and even regardless of whether the act is in accordance with ones community’s law or not.
- 70. Post-conventional •An agent has attained full moral development if she acts according to her well-though-out rational principles.
- 71. Fifth Stage • The moral agent sees the value of the social contract. • Agreements that rational agents have arrived at whether explicitly or implicitly in order to serve what can be considered the common good are what one ought to honor and follow. • The notion of common good is post-conventional in the sense that this is morally desirable whether the agent will benefit from doing so or not. • Thus, what is good or right is what honors the social contract; what contradicts it is bad.
- 72. Sixth stage • One realizes that all the conventions (laws, rules, and regulations) of society are only correct if they are based on these universal ethical principles; they must be followed only if they reflect universal ethical principles. • For Kohlberg, this is the full maturity of post- conventional thinking since this stage recognizes that in the end, the question of what one ought to do goes back to the individual moral agent and her own rationality.
- 74. Feelings in Moral Deliberation •Emotions or feelings have been long derided by purely rationalistic perspectives as having no place in a properly executed moral decision. This prejudice, however, needs to be re-examined thoroughly. •A more realistic attitude toward decision-making is to appreciate the indispensable role emotions have on an agent’s act of choosing.
- 75. Feelings in Moral Deliberation • Aristotle points out that moral virtue goes beyond the mere act of intellectually identifying the right thing to do. Instead, it is the condition of one’s character by which the agent is able to manage her emotions or feelings. • Aristotle does not say, “remove all feelings”, instead, he sees that cultivating one’s character lies in learning to manage one’s feelings.
- 76. Feelings in Moral Deliberation • The emotions are, as much as reason itself, part of what makes one a human being. • Aristotle accepts that feelings cannot be set aside in favor of some illusory, purely intellectual acceptance of the good. • Instead, he sees moral virtue as a matter of habitually managing one’s feelings in the rightful manner. • Doing the right thing for Aristotle is being able to manage one’s feelings so that she is actually driven or propelled to do what she already sees (intellectually) as right.
- 77. Feelings in Moral Deliberation •The mature moral agent realizes that she is both a product of many forces, elements, and events, all of which shape her situation and options for a decision.
- 78. Moral Problems
- 79. Moral Problems •We must understand that there are different types of moral problems, each one acquiring a particular set of rational deliberations. •The first step that we ought to take if there is a potential ethical issue is to determine our level of involvement in the case at hand.
- 80. Moral Problems •In Ethics class, students are made to imagine what they would do in a particular situation. •Their moral imagination is being exercised in the hope of cultivating moral reasoning and giving direction to the needed cultivation of their feelings through habits. •Giving moral judgment, but does not necessarily involve ourselves.
- 81. Moral Problems •Being a moral agent specifically refers to being engaged in, whether we are making judgment on a case that we are not involved in or if we truly need to make a decision in a situation that demands that we act.
- 82. Moral Problems • We need to make sure of the facts. • The first fact to establish is whether we are faced with a moral situation or not. • But if the situation we are involved in truly has moral weight, if it strikes one to the core because it involves what it truly means to be human, then we must now establish all the facts that might have a bearing on our decision. • We must set aside all details that have no connection to the situation.
- 83. Moral Problems •The responsible moral individual must make sure that she possesses all the facts she needs for that particular situation, but also only the facts that she needs – no more, no less.
- 84. Moral Problems •Identify all the people who may potentially be affected by the implications of a moral situation or by our concrete choice of action. •This people are called the stakeholders. •Identifying these stakeholders forces us to give consideration to people aside from ourselves.
- 85. Moral Problems • The psychological tendency of most of us when confronted with an ethical choice is to simply think of ourselves, of what we need, or of what we want. • This is also where we can be trapped in an immature assumption that the only thing important is what we “feel” at that moment, which usually is reducible to Kohlberg’s notion of pre-conventional thinking.
- 86. Moral Problems • When we identify all the stakeholders, we are obliged to recognize all the other people potentially concerned with the ethical problem at hand, and thus must think of reasons aside from our own self- serving ones, to come up with conclusions that are impartial (in the sense that they take consideration of everyone’s welfare), though still thoroughly involved.
- 87. Moral Problems •Aside from identifying the stakeholders, we must also determine how they may be affected by whichever choice the agent makes in the given ethical situation, as well as to what degree.
- 88. Moral Problems •After establishing the facts and identifying the stakeholders and their concerns in the matter, we must now identify the ethical issue at hand.
- 89. Moral Problems •1. We need to clarify whether a certain action is morally right or morally wrong. (Ethical theories or framework can serve) •2. Determining whether a particular action in question can be identified with a generally accepted ethical or unethical action. (Death Penalty tantamount to murder?)
- 90. Moral Problems •3. Ethical Dilemma – Dilemmas are ethical situations in which there are competing values that seem to have equal worth. (2 competing moral goods or between two evils) •4. Final step is for individual to make her ethical conclusion or decision, whether in judging what ought to be done in a given case or in coming up with a concrete action she must actually perform.
- 91. • Real Ethical decisions are often very difficult enough to make and for so many different reasons. • 1. Not all facts in a given case may be available to the agent for her consideration. • 2. Some facts, may eventually turn out to be misleading, or not true at all, and so the agents’ vigilance and meticulousness in establishing the facts will always be tested in any given ethical situation. • 3. It is extremely demanding to account for all the stakeholders concerned as well as the identity and extent of their interests in the particular case. • 4. Many people tend to underestimate the value of the human rights of criminals. • 5. The difficulty to identifying all the values at play in a given ethical issue.
- 92. Moral Problems • The responsible moral individual must forge on realizing full well that cultivating one’s capacity for mature moral choice is a continuing journey in her life. • Aristotle recognizes the importance of continuous habituation in the goal of shaping one’s character so that she becomes more used to choosing the right thing.
- 93. The Value of Studying Ethical Theories or Frameworks
- 94. Ethical theories or frameworks •None of the ethical frameworks we have studied is final and complete. •How then should one make use of them for the development of her faculty of moral valuation?
- 95. Ethical theories or frameworks •These ethical theories or frameworks may serve as guideposts, given that they are the best attempts to understand morality that the history of human thought has to offer.
- 96. Utilitarianism •Utilitarianism – pays tribute to the value of impartiality, arguing that an act is good if it will bring about the greatest good for the greatest number of those affected by the action, and each one of those affected should be counted as one, each equal to each. •Utilitarianism, puts more value on the notion of “common good” compared to any of the other ethical frameworks we have covered.
- 97. Natural Law Theory •The natural law theory, on the other hand, puts more emphasis on the supposed objective, universal nature of what is to be considered morally good, basing its reasoning on the theorized existence of a “human nature.”
- 98. Kantian Deontology • Kantian deontology puts the premium on rational will, freed from all other considerations, as the only human capacity that can determine one’s moral duty. Kant focuses on one’s autonomy as constitutive of what one can consider as moral law that is free from all other ends and inclinations – including pain and pleasure as well as conformity to the rules of the group. • This shows Kant’s disdain for these rules as being authorities external to one’s own capacity for rational will.
- 99. Virtue Ethics •From valuing all human beings to intuiting what is universally good and to practicing one’s autonomy in determining what one ought to do, all of these explore the possible roles of reason and free will in identifying what one ought to do in a given moral situation. •Aristotle’s virtue ethics indicates the need for the habituation of one’s character to make any and all of these previous considerations possible.
- 100. Virtue Ethics •To weigh the collective happiness of human beings, to choose to act on what one’s innermost nature dictates, and to practice one’s autonomy regardless of all other considerations especially those that impinge on one’s will: these are lofty enough goals for human reason and will. But what can possibly sustain or brace a moral agent so that she is able to maintain the effort to implement such rigorous demands on the part of reason?
- 101. Virtue Ethics •Aristotle’s answer is the solid resolve of one’s character, which can only be achieved through the right kind of habituation.
- 102. Ethical Theories or Framework •One has to realize that the philosophical study of ethical theories or frameworks must not merely end in smorgasbord of theories from which one may choose a framework that she may apply willy-nilly to a particular moral situation.
- 103. Ethical Theories or Framework •What the responsible moral individual must instead perform is to continuously test the cogency and coherence of the ethical theory or framework in question against the complexity of the concrete experience at hand.
- 105. Self, Society, and Environment •In the realm of the self, as noted earlier, one has to pay attention not just on how one deals with oneself, but also on how one interacts with other individuals in personal relations.
- 106. Self, Society, and Environment •One may respond to the demand for an ethically responsible “care for the self” by making full use of the four ethical theories or frameworks.
- 107. Self, Society, and Environment •Utilitarianism of John Stuart Mill, seemingly a hedonistic theory given its emphasis on maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain, elevates the human element above the animalistic and above the merely selfish.
- 108. Self, Society, and Environment •While Jeremy Bentham, theory is on what makes an action good is that it brings about the greatest happiness for the greatest number. •Greatest happiness for Bentham then means quantity, but not just for oneself since the other half of his maxim refers to “the greatest number” that points to the extent or number of people affected by this happiness.
- 109. Self, Society, and Environment •What is good or right does not simply reduce to what “I feel is good for me” but in the higher kinds of pleasure that are apt for the human being and which would be of benefit to the greatest number affected.
- 110. Self, Society, and Environment •Thomas Aquinas’s natural law theory states that any action that sustains and cultivates one’s biological or physical existence is to be deemed good, while all actions that lead to the destruction of one’s existence is to be called bad or evil. •Aquinas thus specifies that taking care of one’s being is a moral duty that one owes to herself and to God.
- 111. Self, Society, and Environment •Also, natural law says that part of human nature is to promote the truth and cultivate a harmonious life in society with other humans. •Thus, the moral philosophy of Aquinas calls on a person to go beyond what she thinks she wants and to realize instead what her innermost nature inclines her to do, which is the promotion of life, of the truth, and of harmonious coexistence with others.
- 112. Self, Society, and Environment •Kant’s deontology celebrates the rational faculty of the moral agent, which sets it above merely sentient beings. •Kant’s principle of universalizability challenges the moral agent to think beyond her own predilections and desires, and to instead consider what everyone ought to do.
- 113. Self, Society, and Environment • His principle of humanity as end in itself teaches one to always treat humanity, whether in her own self or in any other individual, as the end or goal of all human actions and never merely as the means. • What kant’s concerned with is when someone merely uses a human being, whether another person or herself, and forgets to treat that human being as the goal or purpose of an action in and of herself.
- 114. Self, Society, and Environment •Kant principle of autonomy teaches one that no one else can tell her what she ought to do in a particular situation; the highest authority is neither the king nor the general nor the pope. •The highest authority, that which is self-legislating in the realm of moral law, is none other than the rational individual herself.
- 115. Self, Society, and Environment •Her moral or ethical responsibility to herself is to maintain her dignity as a rational agent, and thus become the self-legislator in the realm of morality.
- 116. Self, Society, and Environment •Aristotle’s virtue ethics teaches one to cultivate her own intellect as well as her character to achieve eudaimonia in her lifetime.
- 117. Self, Society, and Environment •For Aristotle, one’s ethical or moral responsibility to herself is one of self- cultivation. •What the thinker is more concerned with is whether one’s actions lead one to become a better person in terms of cultivating her character.
- 118. Self, Society, and Environment •Life for Aristotle is all about learning from one’s own experiences so that one becomes better as a person. But make no mistake about this, one must become a better person and not just live a series of endless mistakes.
- 119. Self, Society, and Environment •Aristotle Virtue Theory also teaches one must always find and act on the mesotes whether in treating oneself or any other human being. •The mesotes points to the complexity of knowing what must be done in a specific moral situation, which involves identifying the relevant feelings that are involved and being able to manage them.
- 120. Social Life: In the Philippine Context and in the Global Village
- 121. Social Life: In the Philippine Context and in the Global Village •Philippine society, is made up of many ethnolinguistic groups, each with its own possibly unique culture and set of traditions. •The demands of the nation-state, as seen in the laws of the land, sometimes clash with the traditions of indigenous culture.
- 122. Social Life: In the Philippine Context and in the Global Village • An individual must therefore think carefully whether her action, even if her culture approves of it (whichever it might be – “Filipino” culture, Ibaloi culture, and Maranaw culture, among others), will truly benefit everyone affected by it. • The notion of the “greatest number” can also go beyond the borders of one’s own perceived territory. Should one stop at “what is good for us” even if it is for the detriment of other people from other lands.
- 123. Social Life: In the Philippine Context and in the Global Village • Thomas Aquinas natural theory has clear conception of the principles that should guide the individual in her actions that affect her larger society. • Once more, human life, the care and education of children, and the promotion of truth and harmonious social living should be in the mind of an individual when she performs actions directed to the larger whole.
- 124. Social Life: In the Philippine Context and in the Global Village Kant argues that for the use of principles of universalizability and of humanity as end in itself to form a person’s autonomous notion of what she ought to do. Kant says to follow law, that she understands why it is truly the right thing to do.
- 125. Social Life: In the Philippine Context and in the Global Village Aristotle’s virtue ethics prescribes mesotes as the guide to all the actions that a person has to take, even in her dealing with the larger community of people. Virtues such as justice, temperance, liberality, magnificence, friendliness, and rightful indignation suggest that they are socially- oriented Aristotelian virtues.
- 126. Social Life: In the Philippine Context and in the Global Village A person ought to be guided by them in her dealings with either the local or the wider global society.
- 128. Non-Human Environment •Questions of environmental ethics, of the ethical or moral responsibilities human beings have toward the non- human world, only appeared in the twentieth century.
- 129. Non-Human Environment •Utilitarianism hedonistic doctrine that focuses on the sovereignty of pleasure and pains in human decision-making should extend into other creatures that can experience pleasures and pains; namely, animals. •Thus, one of the sources of animal ethics is utilitarianism.
- 130. Non-Human Environment •Of course, animals themselves cannot become moral agents because they do not seem to have reason and free will. However, animals can experience pleasure and pain. •It is concluded that only humans can make moral decisions, animal ethics proponents argue that humans should always take into account the potential pleasure or pain that they may inflict on animals.
- 131. Non-Human Environment • What is good then is not only what is good for the greatest number of human beings affected, but also for the greatest number of creatures that can feel pleasure or pain. • To extend the argument, though the other members of an ecosystem (e.g., plants) may not have the capacity for pleasure and pain, human still ought to perform actions that will not lead to their destruction, that in turn might lead to pain for the animals that live off them.
- 132. Non-Human Environment •There is a general call for actions that do not just benefit humans but the whole ecosystem as well, since it is possible that nonhuman creatures might be harmed by neglecting the ecosystem.
- 133. Non-Human Environment • Thomas Aquinas, mentioned that certain actions should be avoided because they do not produce a harmonious, peaceful society. • One can argue that neglecting the physical environment because of shortsighted economic goal (e.g., overfishing the waters off the coast of our island or cutting down trees in our mountains and hills) will eventually lead to disasters such as flooding or famines that will affect society in a detrimental fashion.
- 134. Non-Human Environment •Aristotle support the argument that a person has the moral responsibility to see beyond what is immediate. •If so, one must see beyond the satisfaction of immediate economic needs and make sure that harming the environment for the sake of such will not eventually lead to something much worse.
- 135. A Closing that is Really an Opening
- 136. A closing that is really an opening • We should already have a more or less clear idea of how to make informed moral decisions. • In the end, there is only a beginning: there is only the human individual along with her community of fellow human beings who need to accept that they must continue to explore the meaning of what is good and right while hoping to arrive at the best judgments they can make at this point in time.
- 137. A closing that is really an opening •Realizing the finitude of human understanding and of the capacity to make choices, but at the same time hoping that one’s best attempt at doing what is right does mean something in the end – these are part and parcel of making informed moral decisions.