OUR LADY OF LOURDES COLLEGE FOUNDATION

Vinzons Ave., Daet, Camarines Norte, 4600 Philippines

COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

SECOND SEMESTER
S.Y. 2020-2021

Module in Flexible Learning

Midterm: March 1 – March 26, 2021
GE 8 – ETHICS
LESSON 4
THE OBJECTS OF MORAL PHILOSOPHY

Introduction:

Ethics deals on the principles and laws on the morality of human acts. It covers what make the action
good or bad. We usually think that the person who does a moral act is the principal cause of that moral
act. On this course, ethics helps us analyze and know its main focus in the whole study.

Overview:

This lesson tackles the two objects of ethics wherein this will lead us to properly know the right answer to
the question; “What makes the person good or bad? Is it the one who acts or the action he/she performs?”

Learning Objectives:

At the end of this module, the students are expected to:

1. appraise material and non-material objects of ethics;

2. evaluate human acts as formal objects of ethics; and
3. gain basic information about the nature of human acts.

PRELIMINARY TEST

Analyze the situation carefully and answer the following questions. You may use bond paper or yellow
pad for your answer.

Best friend’s goal

Pedro and Juan are best friends since elementary. Now that they are in college, they
also choose same course because they both want to serve and protect their country
as policemen. A day before examination, Pedro was not able to review because he
is sick while Juan reviewed all the lessons. During examination day, Pedro decided
to take examination. As best friends, Pedro asked Juan to share his answers with
him to pass the exam. Juan was hesitant because they might be caught by the
professor, but decided to let Pedro copied all his answer.

1. Who are the persons involved in the story?

2. What are the actions involved?
3. What do you think are the actions done by Pedro? Is it right or wrong? Explain.
4. Analyze the decision done by Juan letting Pedro copy all his answers. Is it right
or wrong? Explain.
5. If you are Pedro’s best friend, what would you do?
Ethics – Midterm Modules | 1
Lesson Proper:

We usually think that the person who does a moral act is the principal cause of that moral act, so that
when a person tries to steal, the act of stealing is usually attributed to him. This is because the person is
the one causing his own actions. He or she acts on his/her own volition or motives. If Pedro lies, Pedro is
thought to be immoral. But what really is immoral? Is it Pedro (the person) who lies, or is it the act of
lying which Pedro performs? This question points to the fact that though we are the causes of our actions,
we are distinct from the actions which we cause, that is, there is a distinction between the doer of the act
and the act done by the doer (lying). The doer and the act being done are two special objects of Ethics.

MATERIAL AND NON-MATERIAL OBJECTS OF ETHICS

The physical doer of an act is the material object of Ethics. The material object of ethics is also called a
“moral agent”. The material object of ethics is usually a human being who is endowed with reason and
freedom, and is thus a being who acts freely and purposefully. As the doer of moral acts, the material
object of ethics is the cause of his or her actions.

It is also important to note that the material object of ethics does not only refer to a person but also to an
institution or organization that performs rational activities (for instance, decision making). Hence,
material object of ethics may include social institutions such as the government, business firms, and other
social organizations.

The non-material object of ethics, on the other hand, refers to the action done by a moral agent. It is called
non-material because actions are not physical entities that can be readily perceived (what we can perceive
directly are moral agents behaving in a particular way). For example, telling the truth (or lying) or
keeping a promise (or breaking it). In the given situation in preliminary test, the material object or moral
agent are Pedro and Juan. The non-material objects in the case of Juan, i.e., the preparation for the exam
and the act of cheating; for Pedro, the act of cheating.

THE FORMAL OBJECT OF ETHICS

Now the question: which of the two objects constitute the formal object of Ethics? We can see this if we
try to understand the nature of Ethics. Remember that ethics is the study of what makes a particular action
better than the other. It concerns the study of human conduct. Because its primary concern is the study of
moral acts, it is easy to understand that the non-material objects of ethics or the acts are considered to be
the formal object of Ethics.

However, not all non-material objects or actions are considered formal objects of ethics because not all
acts are of value to Ethical Analysis. Ethical Analysis is a conceptual tool used in moral philosophy to
solve moral dilemma.

Ethics – Midterm Modules | 2

LEARNING ASSESSMENT:

Instruction: Identify if the items below are material or non-material objects of Ethics. Write your answer
after each item. Use long bond paper or yellow pad.

1. Office of the President - ___________

2. Eating apple - ___________
3. Gossiping - ___________
4. New People’s Army - ___________
5. HUKBALAHAP - ___________
6. Supreme Student Council - ___________
7. Looking at someone with malice ___________
8. Copying friend’s answer in modules ___________
9. OLLCF - ___________
10. Failure of submitting the outputs ___________

Case Analysis:

work the case (given in the previous module) below. What are the material and non-material objects of
Ethics in the case? What is the formal object?

CARDO DALESAY

Cardo desperately needed money for his son’s expensive heart transplant. After doing
everything, he still failed to raise the amount necessary for the operation. “I am sorry, Cardo”,
the surgeon told him when he tried to beg; “It’s the policy. No cash or no insurance policy, no
operation.” Watching his dying son, Cardo was left with no options. He took out his gun and
seized the hospital staff. “My son dies, you all die. He lives, you can all go home.” Cardo
desperately announced to the horror-stricken doctors. “Now, doctor, fix my son’s heart.”

LESSON 5
HUMAN ACTS AND ACTS OF MAN

Introduction:

Ethics deals on the principles and laws on the morality of human acts. It covers what make the action
good or bad. We usually think that the person who does a moral act is the principal cause of that moral
act. On this course, ethics helps us analyze and know its main focus in the whole study.

Overview:

This lesson tackles the two general forms of action. The discussion will lead us to better understand what
actions are belong and are not to the formal objects of ethics.

Learning Objectives:

At the end of this module, the students are expected to:

1. differentiate human acts and acts of man;

2. acknowledge the different elements of human acts; and
3. analyze actions that are subject to ethical analysis.

Ethics – Midterm Modules | 3

PRELIMINARY TEST

Answer the following questions using bond paper or yellow pad.

1. What are your motivations in doing good actions?

2. How can you say that your action is bad?
3. “Think before you click.” What is your thought about the statement?
4. Do you always think of the possible consequences of your action before you act? Explain.

Lesson Proper:

It should be clearer by now that the formal objects of ethics are the non-material objects or the acts
performed by the moral agent. However, this needs some clarification. Let us consider some non-material
objects presented in the table below which are usually performed by moral agents:

ACTION A ACTION B
Talking Telling the truth
Chewing food Helping
Hearing Eavesdropping
Speaking Slandering

If we compare the list of actions in the first column (Action A) with the list of actions in the second
column (Action B), it becomes clear that not all non-material objects of ethics are to be considered as
formal objects of ethics. This is because not all acts have value for the purpose of ethical analysis.

Action A are natural acts and as such, they cannot be judged to be ethical or unethical, while Action B are
acts that are purposive (or performed with moral intent) and they can either be ethical or unethical. But
what are these morally significant acts?

Human Acts are actions that are conscious, deliberate, intentional and voluntary (Action B of the table
presented above fall under this type of acts). These actions are products of rationality and freedom of
choice like telling the truth, helping others in distress, caring for the sick, including ethically dubious acts
such as murdering, stealing, lying, etc. in short, human acts are acts that are either ethical or unethical,
but not morally indifferent (an act is morally indifferent when it is not possible to judge them as ethical or
unethical).

Acts of Man, on the other hand, refers to certain types of actions that are naturally exhibited by man and
as such, they are morally indifferent (or neutral) because we cannot judge them to be either ethical or
unethical (Action A in the table fall under this type of acts). Acts of man are natural acts that we usually
perform by virtue of our nature as animal beings.

Two categories of Acts of Man:

1. Natural-involuntary Acts are forms of acts of man that are performed intuitively or
involuntarily (acts that man naturally exhibits but are beyond his control). For example, blinking
of the eye, beating of the heart, sneezing, yawning, etc. as you reading this item, your heart is
beating and your eyes are blinking without you being constantly aware of it

2. Natural-voluntary Acts are natural acts that man performs. But these acts are within his will to
control at least for some period of time. For example, breathing, sleeping, eating, drinking, and

Ethics – Midterm Modules | 4

 urinating. We can decide when and where to urinate but definitely we have no power to decide
never to urinate for the rest of our lives.

It is clear that acts of man are integral to the survival of human beings. It is because of their naturalness or
their being biological necessities that make them void of any moral worth. However, it is important to
note that there are special circumstances where some acts of man, particularly the natural-voluntary acts,
may become human acts, that is, they may possess, in some cases, a moral value. Hence, they may be
judged to be either moral or immoral. This happens when natural-voluntary acts are performed beyond
their natural purpose that would tend to violate some rules of good conduct. For instance, sleeping is a
natural-voluntary act. But when a teacher sleeps in the class or when a security guard sleeps on duty, they
can hardly be judged as merely performing a natural act. Sleeping in this case is immoral and unethical.

FORMS OF HUMAN ACTS

It is important to understand that human acts are not always the acts we observe every day. There are acts
that we can perceive easily like cheating, helping others. But there are also some acts which we cannot
directly observe (other people’s thoughts). For example, an adulterous thought of a person (who is
looking at his neighbor’s wife) is something we cannot directly observe.

1. External Acts are acts that are externalized or manifested. For example, talking, laughing, crying,
cleaning etc.
2. Internal Acts are acts that are not bodily manifested. These acts are subjective or personal. As
such, it is difficult for other persons to know them (unless the moral agent reports to another).

CLASSIFICATIONS OF HUMAN ACTS

1. Ethical or moral acts – are human acts that may be in conformity to a standard or norm of
morality. Moral or ethical actions may include helping others in need, taking examinations
honestly, etc.
2. Unethical or immoral acts – are human acts that may be in violation of a standard or norm of
morality. Immoral or unethical actions may include refusing to help others in distress, cheating at
examination, etc.
3. Amoral acts – the prefix a means “without,” hence the term “amoral” is literally understood as
without moral content. Amoral acts are also called Neutral Acts because they are neither moral
nor immoral.

ELEMENTS OF HUMAN ACTS

In order to understand how moral theories are used in analyzing moral dilemmas, it is important to have a
good grasp of the elements present in any human act.

1. The Intention of the Act – the motive or the reason why the act is being done. The object or
intention is the end of the act, that is, moral agents act for a particular end.
2. The Means of the Act – the object employed or the medium used to carry out the intention of the
act.
Ethics – Midterm Modules | 5
 3. The End of the Act – the intention of the act is directed at a desired end or a perceived good, such
as living a well-balanced life or graduating with honors. The end of the act is the inspiration
behind the intention of the act.
4. The Consequence of the Act – the result, outcome, or the actual conclusion or termination of the
moral act. This determines whether the intention of the act was carried out or if the end of the act
is successfully realized.

Human Acts and Human Will

Human acts stem from the human will. It is will that controls or influences the internal and external
actions of man. The will stirs a person to act or to refrain from acting. It colors his motive as to why he
engages or disengages from a certain act.

Will is part of the soul that affects freedom and reason. The will is the agency of choice as it may prompt
reason to overpower passion. It may arouse passion and allow it to overrun reason. As such, the will is a
potential force for both good and evil. The strength and weakness of the will determines the strength or
the weakness of the human character. If action follows being, and if the will affects moral action, the will
must be brought closer to reason and to the proper sense of morality and goodness.

LEARNING ASSESSMENT:

Make your answers brief and direct. You may use bond paper or yellow pad for your answer.

1. Give 5 actions that belong to Human Acts. Indicate short explanation why they belong to Human
Acts.
2. Give 5 cases of Acts of Man that may become human acts.
3. Why do you think acts of man have no moral value?
4. How can you make the will choose goodness and truth?

5. Complete the box below on what are the possible elements of human acts they may have.

Action Intention Means End Consequence

1. Cheating
2. Studying
3. Killing
4. Saving a drowning child
5. Helping a friend
6. Telling a truth
7. Sleeping on duty
8. Lying
9. Keeping a promise
10. Gossiping

Ethics – Midterm Modules | 6

 LESSON 6
APPROACHES AND PARADIGMS OF MORAL PHILOSOPHY

Introduction:

We can study Moral Philosophy in two ways. One is by describing the kinds of principles people use in
making moral judgments; and the other way is by formulating norms or principles by which we may
prescribe how we ought to act in particular situation. The study of ethics can either falls under two
general categories: Descriptive and Normative.

Overview:

In this lesson, we will discuss the approaches used in the study of ethics, and briefly, some ethical
theories.

Learning Objectives:

At the end of this module, the students are expected to:

1. discuss the two major moral paradigms in the Normative approach;

2. acknowledge the importance of studying different moral theories; and
3. evaluate the different moral theories in day to day living.

PRELIMINARY TEST

REACTION PAPER: Minimum of three paragraphs. In your own words, write a reaction paper about
the following statements:

1. “The end does not justify the mean.”

2. The story of Robin Hood: The action performed by Robin Hood stealing foods/money to the rich
and gives them to the poor.

Lesson Proper:

THE DESCRIPTIVE APPROACH

When we describe something, we don’t say how things should be, rather, we simply report how things
actually are (or how people are actually acting or behaving). This way, we study moral philosophy as
objectively as possible.

Describing how people act in moral situations is the scientific way of studying human morality. This
approach to the study of human morality is called Descriptive Ethics. This approach aims to make an
objective analysis of the case. For instance, a cross-cultural study shows that 98% of 200,000 respondents
claim that they act only if it serves their interests; the study simply reports that people tend to be selfish.

The descriptive approach ignores the issue whether the subjects of the study acted unethically or whether
selfishness is unethical. All it has to say is that people tend to be selfish.

Ethics – Midterm Modules | 7

THEORIES UNDER DESCRIPTIVE APPROACH

1. Psychological Egoism

Psychological Egoism is not an ethical doctrine but a theory concerning human motivation. The theory
says nothing about what is good or bad, right or wrong, rather, it is simply declares that based on various
scientific studies, everyone is fundamentally selfish, that everybody always does what pleases him and
that the only thing people ever want is their satisfaction.

2. Cultural Relativism

Cultural Relativism does not prescribe how people should act, rather, it describes how people, when
grouped and observed in their own cultural realities, actually differ in their behavior. What is good or bad
according to this theory is relative to the people’s own culture or sets of cultural beliefs and practices. For
instance, we usually perceive pre-marital sex between two adolescents to be immoral. But for the tribes in
Africa, adults take pride in encouraging their children to have premarital sex as early as sixteen years old.
This proves that there are no objective or discoverable moral imperatives but only sets of arbitrarily-
determined moral rules which differ from culture to another.

NORMATIVE APPROACH: Prescribing How People Should Act

Ethics as normative study is not merely a description of what people find morally good and morally bad.
It seeks to discover norms or principles that ought to guide actions good and bad actions bad. Ethics tries
to prescribe practical knowledge about how we should conduct our lives by understanding better our own
moral assumptions.

Normative Ethics does not come with a clean system of right or wrong. If ethics is to be viewed like an
automated teller machine where we can get what we want by the push of a button, then we should prepare
ourselves to be frustrated. There are no automatic answers in Ethics. it is true that ethics can give answers
to moral questions or it can advise us on what to do if we are “morally” confused. The problem is, it gives
many answers and too much advice. Worse, the answers and advice are conflicting and contradictory,
leaving us more confused than before.

Normative ethics complicates things because it has many theories. If it makes things more complicated,
rather than simple, or if ethics makes people more confused than enlightened, what is the point in
studying ethics?

The answer is simple: Ethics does not really make people confused. The apparent confusion stems from
choosing from a wide array of moral options that are made available to us for the very first time.
Normative theories help us recognize other factors that we previously missed to consider. They present
other reasons which we previously failed to think about. Though it makes deciding a little more
complicated, these theories afford us better alternatives and better reasons for accepting them. This way,
ethics enlightens us. With ethics, we have the opportunity to make choices in a more enlightened
environment. It allowed us to make more informed decisions. Ethics encourages us to think critically, to
weigh our options wisely, and to exercise our autonomy and our sense of objectivity in making moral
decisions.

Ethics – Midterm Modules | 8

Moral Paradigms of Normative Ethics

In the previous section, we discussed Normative Ethics as having various theories that explain what
makes an act good or bad. These theories can be generally categorized under two schools of thoughts or
moral paradigms. First: The Consequentialist Ethics. Second: The Nonconsequentialist Ethics.

Consequestialist Ethics and Nonconsequentialist Ethics are called “schools of thought” or “paradigms”
because they are not simply theories. They are systems or bodies of different theories. What groups the
different theories into two distinct moral paradigms is their common feature in evaluating moral acts.

Theories under Consequentialist ethics accentuate the consequences of acts: if the consequence of the act
is good, it is morally good. Theories under Nonconsequentialist ethics, on the other hand, emphasize the
motive of the act: if the act is well intended (or performed out of a sense of duty). Then regardless of the
consequence, the act is good. Let us examine the figure below:

Elements of Human Acts

Motive/Intention Means Consequences

(Probable and Actual)

NONCONSEQUENTIALIST ETHICS CONSEQUENTIALIST ETHICS

The figure shows the basic difference between non-consequentialist and consequentialist ethics, in terms
of their emphasis on particular elements of human acts.

CONSEQUESTIALIST ETHICS (also called Teleological Ethics)

Consequentialist Ethics is a body of normative ethical theories that tries to measure the morality of an
action based solely on its consequences. If the consequence is good, regardless whether or not the motive
is good, the act is always morally good. There are various forms of consequentialist ethics though that
vary in their determination of what consequences are relevant and in how the value of the consequences is
to be determined.

Major Theories under Consequentialist Ethics

1. Hedonism – the view that only pleasure (regardless if the pleasure is mental or physical, but
mostly sensual) is the only good as an end. Hence, eating all you can till you can, drinking all you
can till you drop are few examples of a good that should be pursued.
2. Utilitarianism – claims that the greatest happiness or good of the greatest number of persons is
the test of right and wrong. For instance, if stealing will enable me to help many poor people,
then, stealing becomes good.
3. Perfectionism or Self-Realizationism – a rival of utilitarianism, holds that the ultimate end is the
full development or perfection of the self. To study hard, to exercise daily, to be moral, etc are
examples of things that are considered good because they are good for the perfection of the self.
Perfectionism is concerned only with the self, and little concern for others simply because it is the
duty of others to perfect themselves.

Ethics – Midterm Modules | 9

 4. Ethical Egoism – maintains that an action is good only if it promotes the good or the best
interests of the one performing the act. This theory is consequentialist but unlike most
consequentialist theories, egoism views the good exclusive of the interest of the doer. If the act
brings me more good than bad, then it is good. Ethical egoism poses a difficult challenge to
Ethics itself. It raises the most important question of Ethics: Why do we need to be moral at all?
If we don’t benefit from being ethical, why should we be ethical?

NON-CONSEQUENTIALIST ETHICS (also called Deontological Ethics)

Deontological ethics is a body of ethical theories that tries to measure the morality of an action based on
the nature of its motives and not on its consequences. If the motive or the intention of the act is good, and
as long as the means employed are good, regardless of whether or not the consequence results in good,
the act is always good.

Major Theories under Non-Consequentialist Ethics

1. Kantian Ethics – Kantian Ethics or “Kantianism” hold that for an action to be morally right, it
must satisfy two requirements/principles. First,(The Principle of Universalizability) it must be
willed to be a universal law, that is, it must be willed to be done by everyone under the same
conditions (that is, an act is good if I don’t mind everybody doing it). Second, (The Principle of
Humanity) if it has respected a person’s dignity, that is, it did not use a person as a means to
achieve selfish ends. The moral goodness of an act depends therefore on motives or intentions,
and not on the consequences of what is actually done.
2. Theological Ethics – Theological or divine theory of morality holds that the will of God is what
determins the rightness and wrongness of an act. The will of God is expressed through the Holy
Scriptures and through the dictates of reason inspired by faith. If an act violates any of the
provisions of these sacred sources of morality, then the act is unethical and it should be
condemned regardless of its perceived or actual consequences. For instance, a man who murders
a tyrannical ruler is still acting immorally even if killing tyrannical ruler brings relief to many
people. This is because the man has committed murder, an act that violates the commandment of
God not to kill.

Aside from consequentialist and non-consequentialist ethics, there are other normative theories that have
different account of what determines the morality of actions. We will consider one major example of
these theories here: Situational Ethics.

Situational Ethics claims that the morality of an action depends on the situation where and when it is
being performed. What is good in one situation may not be good in another. For instance, telling the truth
when stranger asks for directions is good, but when a mad man asks for the whereabouts of your friend in
order to kill your friend, telling the truth in this case will be gravely immoral. Hence, situational ethics
asserts that for every moral case, there is a duty to perform and the nature of the condition where we find
ourselves determines what we ought to do in that particular case.

Ethics – Midterm Modules | 10

LEARNING ASSESSMENT:

Make your answers brief and direct. You may use bond paper or yellow pad for your answer.

1. Why do you think we need to be moral?

2. What benefits do we get from being moral or ethical?
3. Which do you prefer? Consequentialist theories or Nonconsequentialist theories? Explain?
4. Give atleast two cases that fall under Cultural Relativism.
5. Differentiate Psychological Egoism and Ethical Egoism. Provide concrete example each.

LESSON 7
MORAL THEORIES AND THE PRACTICE OF MORAL ANALYSIS

Introduction:

Different theories of morality arise from everyday experiences. We expect these theories to tell us what to
do in cases where choices are hard to make. Knowledge of moral theories is very important because these
are tools which we can use to analyze and determine the moral goodness of our decisions.

Overview:

In this lesson, we will discuss the different terminologies that may help us better understand the nature of
ethics.

Learning Objectives:

At the end of this module, the students are expected to:

1. recognize moral dilemmas;

2. use moral theories in solving moral dilemmas; and
3. evaluate oneself on how to face moral dilemma in daily living.

PRELIMINARY TEST

Answer the following questions. You may use bond paper or yellow pad.

1. Give cases where you experience moral dilemma.

2. How do you handle and solve your moral dilemma?

Mother’s Love

Rosa, a mother of three daughters, is being fired from her current job. She cannot handle
the daily needs of her daughters because her partner died a year ago. She cannot handle
the situation seeing her daughters crying out of hunger. She is trying her best to earn
money but, still, failed to accommodate all the expenses. One day, her friend offered her
a secret job and will earn easy money. Rosa will just transfer the illegal drugs to their
buyers. Rosa knowing that it is against the law, but seeing her daughters dying made her
thinks twice.

3. What do you think is the moral dilemma that Rosa is facing?

4. If you are in the situation of Rosa, what will you choose? Justify your answer.
5. What do you think is the best decision that Rosa will do? Justify your answer.

Ethics – Midterm Modules | 11

 6. If Rosa chose to deliver the illegal drugs, what do you think is the Moral Theory that would
justify her decision as good?
7. What moral theory would Rosa violate if she chose to deliver the illegal drugs?

Lesson Proper:

THE NATURE OF MORAL DILEMMA

There are occasions when problems are too complicated. When we are faced with overwhelming
difficulties in deciding what to do, we are in a state of moral dilemma. Moral dilemma occurs when there
is uncertainty or perplexity in selecting the best choice of action between two or more unfavorable
options. In other words, we are in a moral dilemma when we are forced to choose between two necessary
evils. Ordinarily, we all desire some sort of quick fix when we deal with difficult problems. However,
there is no easy way out in complex and confusing ethical problems. The layman’s rule, when forced to
choose between two evils, is to choose the lesser one.

However, a moral dilemma is not simply about conflict of choices like choosing between saving your
mother or your father, between lying or telling the truth. Rather, it is essentially about conflict of
obligation.

For instance, between saving my daughter’s life by stealing my neighbor’s goods and respecting others’
rights to their property at the expense of failing to save my daughter’s life, there exists in me a conflict of
obligation toward my daughter and my neighbor. I have an obligation to save my daughter but I also have
an obligation to respect the rights of my neighbor over his property.

What makes a moral dilemma different from other difficult problems is the test it gives to the moral
character, or to the integrity, or human beings in making decisions. A moral dilemma complicates a
person’s obligation to his family, to his community, to his religion, and finally to the entire community to
which he belongs.

MORAL PHILOSOPHY AND MORAL DILEMMA

The study of Ethics is useless if it cannot help us make more enlightened decisions. We expect Moral
Philosophy to help us solve our moral problems by providing us with rich insights when dealing with
moral issues. Indeed, Moral Philosophy can clarify our beliefs about morality and it can show how these
beliefs can consistently be put into practice. Moral Philosophy provides us with clear and logical theories
as reliable guides to making choices in life’s most trying times.

However, we should not expect moral philosophy to solve our problems in a blink of an eye. Moral
Philosophy cannot solve our moral problems with absolute certainty it can provide us with a theory or a
principle, a method or technique for solving a difficult moral problem.

We must remember that we make our own decisions and that we solve our own moral problems. All these
theories on morals are merely tools that we choose from for making the right decisions.

MORAL DILEMMA AND MORAL THEORIES

A moral theory is an organized system of moral principles that applies in a variety of circumstances to
explain the morality of human actions. Moral principles are generalizations that are accepted as true and
that can be used as bases for reasoning or conduct. A moral theory provides criteria for distinguishing
Ethics – Midterm Modules | 12
good and evil or right and wrong. For instance, we have the Christian Theory of Morality and with it, the
Ten Commandments. When I am forced to choose between killing or not, the theory tells me not to kill
because the Laws of God command that I should not kill. A moral theory also reminds us of cases we
need to consider and other features we need to ignore when making decisions.

MORAL ANALYSIS AND MORAL THEORIES

We usually perform an analysis before arriving at decisions or making solutions to difficult problems.
The term “analysis” refers to the abstract separation of a whole into its constituent parts. Studying the
components of a problem allows us to see the issues in a much better and clearer light. In Moral
Philosophy, we perform a special kind of analysis when we try to solve moral dilemmas. We call it moral
analysis.

Moral Analysis is limited to only one special problem: the morality of human acts, and this problem has
four components: the motive or the reason why the act is performed; the end or the desired goal of the
act; the means or the things employed to achieve the desired end; and the consequence or the possible or
actual result of the act. Thus, when we are faced with conflicting and equally unfavorable options, we
usually evaluate each of the alternative actions either in terms of motives, the desired end, the available
means, or their possible results.

MORAL THEORIES AND MORAL RESPONSIBILITY

Aside from the practical use of moral theories as tools for solving moral dilemmas, our study of these
theories is important for another reason. When we act, we are held responsible for actions: when we act
rightly, we alone deserve praise; when we act badly, we alone deserve the blame.

Good acts stem good decision, and good decisions are usually the fruits of careful decision making. If we
make poor decisions, we tend to act badly. Since we are held responsible for our actions and their
consequences, we therefore need to make decisions more carefully. Moral theories offer us valuable help
by providing us with clear principles and rules for making enlightened decisions.

LEARNING ASSESSMENT:

Make your answers brief and direct. You may use bond paper or yellow pad for your answer.

CASE ANALYSIS:

Case no. 1
Mr. Swimer

Mr. Swimer always wants to take a walk every weekend at the seashore to keep himself
relax from all the work problems in the office. One time, while walking, Mr. Swimer
heard a voice asking for help. He suddenly saw a drowning child in the sea. Mr. Swimer
wants to save the drowning child because he knows that it is his duty to lend help for
someone who is in need and emergency. But Mr. Swimer is worried because if he helps
the child, he knows that anything can go wrong. Mr. Swimer might accidentally drown
the child while saving him because he does not know how to swim.

1. What is the moral dilemma that Mr. Swimer is facing?

2. Analyze the act of Mr. Swimer by identifying the elements of human acts
(intention of the act, means of the act, end of the act, consequence of the act).

Ethics – Midterm Modules | 13

 3. What should determine Mr. Swimer’s decision, his motive or the possible
consequences of his act?
4. If Mr. Swimer decides to help and he accidentally drowns the child, is he morally
responsible for the death of the child?
5. If you are Mr. Swimer and you know that you might accidentally drown the
child, what would you do?

Case no. 2
Revenge of the Fallen

James and Bond were best friends during high school. 10 years later, James saw Bond in
the coffee shop, he still remembers the day when he failed the final exam because Bond
didn’t lend his answers to him which result him not to graduate. James wants to take his
revenge to Bond. He, then, approach him with smile but he plans to put a poison in his
coffee. Few minutes later, Bond goes to CR, James, then, has an opportunity to put the
poison in Bond’s cup. After Bond drinks his coffee, he suddenly collapsed. James asks
for help and takes the blame to the coffee shop owner for poisoning his former best
friend.

1. Analyze the act of James by identifying the elements of human acts (intention of
the act, means of the act, end of the act, consequence of the act).
2. Does James morally responsible for the death of the Bond?
3. What makes James morally responsible?
4. Identify the actions that James are held responsible.
5. Does James experience moral dilemma or not? Defend your answer.

ASSESSMENT /EVALUATION RUBRICS

Grades Rubrics Points Rating Scale for Module Output
A+ Shows complete understanding of the question. Very informative and well organized. Can able to relate the topic to his/her personality
(96-100%) with ease.
A Shows substantial understanding of the question. Good solid response with clear explanation with some minor yet non-trivial gaps in
(92-95%) their reasoning ability.
B+
Response shows some understanding of the question. Meet the requirements of the problem.
(87-90%)
B Shows unclear yet related answer to the problem. Student may have starter out correctly, but gone on a main concept or not finished
(84-86%) the problem.
C+
Shows incomplete answer to the problem.
(80-83%)
C
Misses key points.
(75-79%)
D No answer at all

References:

Ethics: Foundations of Moral Valuation by Oscar G. Bulaong Jr., et. al. (2018)
Moral Philosophy: An Introduction by A. C. Articulo (2004)

Prepared by:

JOHN REY R. BUAN

CAS-INSTRUCTOR

Ethics – Midterm Modules | 14