Ethics (1st Sem) - Introduction to Ethics PDF

**CHAPTER 1** **INTRODUCTION OF ETHICS** Ethics is derived from the Greek work ethos which means "characteristics way of acting". Its Latin equivalent is mos., mores, meaning "tradition or customs". Ethos includes cultural mannerism, religion, politics, law, and social aspirations of a group of pe...

**CHAPTER 1** **INTRODUCTION OF ETHICS** Ethics is derived from the Greek work ethos which means "characteristics way of acting". Its Latin equivalent is mos., mores, meaning "tradition or customs". Ethos includes cultural mannerism, religion, politics, law, and social aspirations of a group of people. In our study, ethos refers to those characteristics belonging to man as a rational being, endowed with intellect and free-will. The ethos of man as man is revealed in the following: 1. He is able to distinguish between good and evil, right and wrong, moral and immoral**.** 2. He feels within himself an obligation to do what is good and to avoid what is evil. 3. He feels himself accountable for his actions, expecting reward or punishments for them. In other words, a man is endowed by nature with a moral sense. He is self-conscious of his dignity and submits to the study of doing what is good and avoiding what is wrong. This much is expected of man: that he conducts himself according to the "dictates of reason". **Ethics, its meaning** Ethics is defined as the science of morality of human act. And because actions reflect the motives of the doer, Ethics is said to be the study of human motivation, and ultimately, of human rational behavior. Those aspects of the subject matter which primarily interests Ethics is morality. Human Acts are those actions performed by man, knowingly and freely. They are also called deliberate or international actions, or, voluntarily actions. As such, they are differentiated from the so-called acts of man which are instinctive and involuntarily. Morality is the quality of human acts by which they are constituted as good, bad, or indifferent. That which is good is described as moral: that which is bad is immoral, and that which is indifferent is amoral. Human acts reveal the thoughts and inclinations of the person doing them. They are then manifestation of one's character or moral conduct. A person who has the habit or inclination to do good is said to be virtues. On the contrary, one who has the habit of doing wrong is vicious. **Ethics as Value Education** In the classical tradition, Ethics is Moral Philosophy and is distinguished from Moral Theology. As a branch of philosophy, Ethics relies solely on human reason to investigate truths. Moral Theology, on the other hand, employs reason insofar as it is enlightened by faith or divine revelation. In contemporary curriculum, Ethics takes the form of value Education. A value is something a person prizes, cherishes, and esteems as important to him. It includes ideas, things, or experiences. The aim of Value Education is to guide the individual in choosing wisely his values and in acting upon them. Ethics is the rational foundation of any attempt at value Education. Ethics goes deeper into the reasons why we must choose certain values. Ethics explain human values in relation to the ultimate purpose of human existence. **The Art of Correct Living** Art, in general, is the appreciation of beauty. It implies order and harmony of parts in a given whole. Human life does not imply merely physical survival. It is a vocation towards the refinement of the spirit. The demands of daily life include and derives meaning from the cultivation of those traits that truly reflects man's innate dignity in this context, Ethics is an art. It is the birth of life, pulsating with the desire for growth and development. It is a master plan indicating where man must go and what he ought to do in order to live well. In a sense, every man is an arrest, creating something of beauty out of his self. **Importance of Ethics** Ethics is an indispensable knowledge. Without moral perception, man is only an animal. Without morality, man as rational being is a failure. Because moral knowledge is too essential to be dismissed, the Creator has seen it fit to gift man with the natural insight of it. No matter how rudimentary and vague, the primitive has it. And modern man, finding convenient reasons to turn his back from it, discovers that he is in the center of it. Moral integrity is the only true measure of what man ought to be. The most powerful king, or the most successful professional, is nothing unless he too is morally upright. Thus, the philosophers speak of Ethics as the "only necessary knowledge". We are tempted to center everything on human happiness". Says Jacques Leclercq, 'forgetting that man's greatness, perfection and happiness, his whole meaning in fact, consist in transcending the common accepted human good". (Christianity and Money, p.9) Morality is the foundation of every human society. Rightly, Russell observes that "without civic morality, communities perish; without personal morality their survival has no value". Every culture admits the importance of morality as standard of behavior. When the moral foundations of a nation are threated that society, itself is threatened. In the words of Senator Leticia Ramos Shahani: **Two Ethical System** There are two general categories under which ethical theories may be classified: the **Atheistical** and **Theistical** approaches. 1. **The Atheistical** **approach** assures that only matter exists and that man is reasonable only to himself since there is no God who creates and rules the universe. Morality is an invention of man to suit his requirements and to preserve his society. Moral truths are therefore temporary and mutable depending on the situation. Accordingly, the concept of good and evil is always relative and changeable. 1. Matter is the only reality 2. Man is matter and does not have spiritual dimension. 3. Man is free and must exercise his freedom to promote the welfare of society. 4. There is no life after death 5. Man is accountable only to the State. 2. **The Theistic approach** begins with the assumption that God is the Supreme Lawgiver. Everything must conform to God's eternal plan of creation. Man must exercise his freedom in accordance with God's will. There are absolute principles of morality which are not changeable. Man is accountable for his actions and deserves either a reward or punishment in this life or in the next. Theistic theories postulate the following truths: 1. God is the Supreme Creator and Lawgiver 2. Man is free and must use his freedom to promote his personal and social interests along with his fellowmen. 3. Man has an immortal soul which cannot die. 4. Man is accountable for his actions, both good and evil. **Ethics and Religion** Ethics is a science and depends upon rational investigation of its truths. Religion is a system of beliefs and practices based on faith or revelation. Ethics teaches the value of religion, presenting it as a duty to the Almighty. Religion, on the other hand, as an organized church, contributes to the teaching of ethics and continues to enrich with it is moral insights. Thus, religion provides both the direction and motivation for the moral life of people. While different religions give different emphasis to different moral values, they coincide in their efforts to improve both man and human society. All great religions, for instance, hold life in deep respect and propose universal brotherhood as necessary for global peace and prosperity. **Ethics and law** Ethics studies human motivation. It goes deeper than the study of external actions. It explores thoughts and feelings. It requires that man desires that which is good and act in accordance with that desire. On the contrary, law requires that we perform the required action regardless of our feelings toward such action. The law is concerned with the externality of the act. "far law is definitely concerned". Says Mortimar J. Adler, with what we do, not with what we feel". (Ethics: the study of Moral Values, vi). Ethical norms cover thoughts feelings. Laws do not judge man's thoughts and desires. In the Ethics of St. Paul, for example, a man commits adultery when he regards a woman lustfully. This is not the case with law which requires an external act as proof that a crime has been committed. Morality therefore, has a wider implication than law, because can either be moral or immoral. Thus, what is legal is not necessarily moral; but what is moral is necessarily worth legalizing. Ethics is not simple a body of do's and don'ts in the manner laws are. Ethics is a personal commitment to uphold what is true and good. Ethics aims to develop "right disposition and inner spirit" for accepting what is lawful. (Bernard Haring, The Law of Christ, vol. I Merein Press, Calc, 1960, p. 42-43.) **Professional Ethics** The practice of a profession cannot be regulated entirely by legislation. Each profession therefore subscribes to set of moral code Ethics guides the actuation of a professional where the law is silent or inadequate. A Code of Ethics implies that, before anything else, a professional is a person who has the obligation to listen to the "dictates of reason". The need for it is obviously to the advantage of the profession. Many businessmen, for example, do realize that "honest business" translates to "good business". The public patronizes firms that are perceived to be reputable. The Code of Ethics for Business proposed by the bishops-Businessmen's Conference for Human Development, Philippines, provides: Towards the Customers, business shall, in the production of goods and services. - strive after a quality that will enable them to serve their purpose efficiently and effectively. - Avoid anything that would be determinantal to the health, shelty or growth pf the power user or beneficiary of such goods and services; - And seek to apply or make use of the discoveries and inventions of science with adaptations that will improve their products or services, thereby benefiting customers/users and increasing their number. *In its marketing arrangement, business shall:* - Deliver the product or service in the quality, quantity, and time agreed upon, and at a reasonable price, and avoid the creation of artificial shortages, price manipulation, and like practices; - Ensure that all mass media, promotional, and package communications be informative and true, and take into account the precepts of morality and the sound cultural values of the community, and manifest respect for human dignity. (p.5) 1. Why is man a moral animal? 2. Philosophers refers to Ethics as "the only necessary knowledge". Explain why. 3. What do you expect to learn from ethics? 4. Is Ethics the same as Religion? Why? 5. Differentiate between ethical norms and law. READING: **Morality is Best from Government** "No system of power can replace morality, which is necessary in any human society. Those were quite meaningful words from Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, spoken in his acceptance speech after he was elected as Executive President of the Soviet Union, the first for a position that was created following dramatic changes in the country's political set-up. While Mr. Gorbachev may have uttered that principle-any society needs morality-in the context of reversing the rising criminality in his land, including abuses of government officials ("... causes that provoke crime."), it can very well be applied on my undertaking in any other country in this world. Indeed, morality or the lack of it plays a major role in government and business dealings, and in the everyday life of every human being. For the Soviet Union's leader, who was called "Man of the Decade"-perhaps in this new one and in the one just ended-morality may have been an inner voice urging him to do his country's part in putting an end to the frightening Col War. The treat to mankind's total annihilation in a nuclear was still exists, of course, but the stage for a substantial arms reeducation has ben set. To be sure, Mr. Gorbachev had a big role in it. The relation, whether tense or otherwise, between the world's two superpowers affects the so called Third World, cannot be denied. Conflicts in other countries struggling to attain economic and political maturity are sometimes the off-shoot of animosity between those superpowers. As their relations warm, other countries of the world may now be closer to achieving peace, even within their own borders. The Soviet Union and its defenders or sympathizers in the past also used the words "democracy" is describing its political system. Mr. Gorbachev, in the same way he made perestroika and glasnost household words in most parts of the world, does not hold back on words to tell what the old order actually was: "an authoritarian bureaucratic system," as against his vision of a "human and democracy socialism" for his country. After all, that is all the reason for the existence of governments, in any form, and the grant of power to their officials. The system must put the people's interest first and foremost. **CHAPTER 2** **THE HUMAN ACTS** Man, no doubt I creative because he possesses tremendous bodily and spiritual powers. Every minute of his life, he acts, transforming himself and the world around him. Action constitutes a person, an individual in control of himself and accountable to himself. What a person is and what becomes of him depend largely on the type of actions he performs during his life-time. **HUMAN ACTS** Distinction is made between human acts and acts of man. The human acts are those actions which man performs knowingly, freely, and voluntarily. These actions are the result of conscious knowledge and are subject to the control of the will. We refer to these actions as deliberate, international, or voluntary. The acts of man are those actions which happen in man. They are instinctive and are not within the control of the will. Such actions are the respiration, fear, anger, love, and jealousy. **ESSENTIAL ATTRIBUTES** For an acts to be considered a human act, it must possess the following characteristic: 1. It must be performed by a conscious agent who is aware of what he is doing and of its consequences. Children below the age of reason, the insane, the senile-are considered incapable of acting knowingly. 2. It must be performed by an agent who is acting freely, hat is, by his own volition and powers. An action done under duress and against one's will is not entirely a free action. 3. It must be performed by an agent who decide willfully to perform the act. Thus, willfulness is the resolves to perform an act here and now, r in some future time. Human acts must, therefore, be knowing, free, and willful. The lack of any of these attributes renders an act defective and less voluntary. **KINDS OF HUMAN ACTS** Human acts are either elicited acts or commanded acts. Elicited acts are those performed by the Will and are not bodily externalized. Paul Glenn enumerates the following elicited acts: 1. Wish is the tendency of will towards something, whether this be realizable or not. The object of wishing may include the impossible, or that which is remotely possible, such as winning the sweepstakes. 2. Intention is the tendency of the will towards something attainable but without necessarily committing oneself to attain it. Such is our intention to study the lesson, to attend a party, or to spend a vacation in Baguio. 3. Consent is the acceptance of the will of those needed to carry out the intention. Thus, a woman is said to show consent when she consciously attracts attention to herself. 4. Election is the selection of the will of those means effective enough to carry out the intention. A salesman shows election when he ops to visit a client instead of just writing him a letter. 5. Use is the command of the will to make use of those means elected to carry out the intention. It is this act of the will which moves the salesman to dress up and take a ride to see his client. 6. Fruition is the enjoyment of the will derived from the attainment of the thing he had desired earlier. The joy of the woman on being complimented for her attractiveness, or, the satisfaction of the salesman in closing a deal with his client-is fruition. Commanded acts are those done either by man's mental or bodily powers under the command of the will. Commanded acts are either internal or external action. Examples of internal actions are conscious reasoning, recalling something, encouraging oneself, controlling aroused emotions and others. Some actions are combinations of internal and external movements such as, listening, studying, reading, driving a car, writing a letter, or playing chess. *(Paul Glenn, Ethics, A Class Manual in Moral Philosophy, Herder Book Co., reprint National Bookstore, Inc., Mla. 1965, pp7-8)* **MORAL DISTINCTIONS** Human acts may either be in conformity or not with the dictate of reason. "Dictates of reason" refers to the shared consciousness of prudent people about the propriety of a certain action or manner of behavior. It shows what is permissible in a given situation, the best option as a matter of fact. "Dictates of Reason" stands for the norm of morality with which is the standards by which actions are judged as to their merits or demerits. On the basis of their relation to the norm of morality, actions are classified into moral, immoral, or amoral. 1. Moral action are those actions which are in conformity with the norm of morality. They are good actions and are permissible. Working, studying, paying a debt, telling the truth, loving a friend-are moral actions. 2. Immoral actions ae those actions which are not in conformity with the norm of morality. They are bad or evil and are not permissible. Refusing to help the needy, committing murder, adultery, stealing, telling lies-are immoral actions. 3. Moral actions are those which stands neutral in relation to the norm of morality. They are neither good nor bad in themselves. But certain amoral actions may become good or bad because of the circumstance's attendant to them. Playing basketball is an amoral act, but plying basketball when one is supposed to be attending a class is wrong. Playing basketball out of sense of duty to the team is good. EXTRINSIC AND INTRINSIC EVIL The relation of actions to the norm of morality is either intrinsic or extrinsic. Something is intrinsic to a thing when it is integral to the nature of that thing. The sweetness of a mango fruit is, for example, intrinsic to it. But the appeal of a mango to a particular person is extrinsic to it, that is, such quality is not an integral element of it as fruit. Some actions are intrinsically evil because their nature is defective either by excess or by lack of certain attributes, such, for example, is the nature of stealing which, by nature, manifests lack of respect for the property of another. Some other actions are extrinsically evil because certain factors attached to them by way of circumstances render them opposed to the norm of morality. Drinking liquor is extrinsically evil when done in excess. Actions that are intrinsically evil are prohibited at all times and under any circumstance. Actions that are extrinsically evil may be tolerated provided the circumstance rendering it to be wrong is first removed. Suicide is intrinsically evil and remains immoral whatever is its justification. Therapeutic abortion is extrinsically evil when it is resorted to as a necessary means to safeguard the life of the mother. **IMPUTABLITY OF HUMAN ACTS** A human act is done by a person who is in control of his faculties: intellect and will. In this sense, a person is like the captain of ship who assumes full responsibility and accountability for his decisions. The imputability of a human act means that the person performing the act is liable for such act, it involves the notion of guilt or innocence. Thus, actions are either praiseworthy or blameworthy. Actions are attributed to the doer as their principal cause. (Paul Glenn: pp. 121-123). **SANCTIONS AND PENALTIES** Imputablility implies that the doer is ether deserving of reward or punishment. This is a basic requirement of justice. The penal laws of our country provide for a system of punishment for crimes, ranging from simple fines to imprisonment. The capital punishment, that is, death penalty, is reserved for: heinous crimes". Unless also prohibited by the laws of the State, immortalities are not given corresponding legal punishment such a fines or imprisonment. The Bible, however, speaks of death as the punishment for "sins". Through the Old Testament interpret this as death by execution, it refers more to spiritual death or suffering. A form of spiritual death is the loss of peace of mind, the only genuine happiness possible in this life. Medical science and psychiatry also show that many diseases, both mental and physical, are caused by spiritual disorientation. Indeed, many of the human sufferings we see and experience are the direct results of immoral situations. For example, an immoral person risk losing his honor, his job, and his family. He also runs the risk of being ostracized. On the other hand, the world looks up to a man of integrity. Peace, contentment, and honor are but some of the rewards coming to an upright person. **VOLUNTARINESS** Voluntariness comes from the Latin word **"voluntas".** Referring to the will. Voluntariness is essential to an act. without it, an act is a mere act of man. We distinguish between prefect and imperfect, and conditional and simple voluntariness. A. **Greek Minds** Etymologically, philosophy is derived from two Greek words philia meaning "love" or "friendship" and Sophia meaning "wisdom". Literally, philosophy means love of wisdom. But what is love and what is wisdom? Basically, love is an urge or drive of the will towards a particular object. As a drive, love always seeks unity with its object; it desires to possess its object. On the other hand, wisdom means the good exercise or application of knowledge. Thus, wisdom cannot be dissociated from knowledge. Truth, however, is considered as the ultimate object of knowledge. Hence, truth is being showed and practiced by a man of wisdom. Now, if philosophy means the love of wisdom, to philosophize, therefore, is to be a quest, or to have a desire towards living the truth. B. **The Chinese Minds** Philosophy, as love of wisdom, is an understanding of philosophy given to use by the ancient Greek philosophers. The Chinese, however, define philosophy as Zhe-Xue or Che Shueh (this is originally coined by Dr. Nishi Amane). The Chinese understand Zhe-Xue or philosophy as the "study of wisdom". Obviously, this definition stands close to the ancient Greek's definition of philosophy as "love of wisdom". For the Chinese, Zhe (as a character) means "wisdom" and Xue (as a character) means study. Significantly, however, the Chinese character Zhe bears the emblem of mouth and hand. This suggests the inseparability of words and action. Thus, for the Chinese, philosophy is the translation of words into action or application of theory into praxis. Hence, Chinese, philosophy singles out a person to live what he says. C. **The Hindus Minds** Indian philosophical concepts, theories, and schools that developed in the Indian subcontinent, including present-day Pakistan and Bangladesh. Most of the philosophical works were written in the Sanskrit language, while in modern times, philosophical works are written, in India, mainly in English, but also in the many modern Indian languages. The Sanskrit words for "philosophy" were "ānviksiki" (examination of things by the means of true cognition) and darśana (a mode of seeing). If the Greek and Chinese have their own definition of philosophy, the, Hindus, too, have something to called their own. For them, philosophy is a Darsana. Darsana means seeing, seeing not only through the eyes but through the whole being of the one that sees. In other words, philosophy for the Hindus means seeing the whole reality through a total advertence and involvement of the looker. This kind of definition debunks our preconception, biases, and prejudices of a certain reality since all this are partial and unholistic treatment of any phenomenon or any reality. **The Origin of Philosophy** "Philosophy begins in Miletus" says Reginald Ellen. The radix of the claim lies on Thales: The acclaimed first philosopher. Way back in the 6th century B.C. lived a man named Pyt hagoras who is acclaimed as the first philosopher (because he coined the term philosophy). But by virtue of the point of origin of philosophy -- which is wonder (by the way, we do not mean that Pythagoras didn't wonder, the thing is, *Thales wondered earlier than Pythagoras)* -- *It is Thales. This highlights the origin of philosophy.* **The Cause of Philosophy** Before we will explain the cause of philosophy, let us first define cause. Usually, cause is identified with reason. This is misleading. Cause and reason are not identical terms. It does not necessarily follow that the reason of something is at the same its cause. Cause refers to anything that contributes to the production of any reality while reason refers to that which, in any manner, contributes to the explanation or understanding of any reality or thing. **The cause of philosophy** -- not necessarily the ultimate cause -- is wonder; philosophy starts at wonder. Wonder, however, is normally expressed in a question. The first man who questioned or wondered was Thales (we will discuss the contents of Thales' wonder under the heading: **The Greek Philosophers'** Concept of Human Nature). Since philosophy takes wonder or question as its cause, it leaves the questioner the answer of his questions. Thus, in philosophy what matters is the question not the answers -- this is because answers can become question themselves. In this vein, it is *sine qua non* that in philosophy only correct questions should come to the fore since philosophy considers correct questions ask more important than correct answers because the latter are just the consequence of the former. In English, we are told that sentences that end with the question mark are questions. In philosophy not all statements that end in question mark are questions. What is a correct question then? A correct question is that which hits the target. That which is sensical. It has a direction which is rooted in a reality that serves as the point of interest in the discussion. By wondering and eventually positing correct questions the application of philosophy surfaces. To philosophize or philosophizing is the proper term attributed to this cerebral and empirical activity. Philosophizing starts in a wonder. Wonder is expressed in a question. When question arises, reasoning to experience, reflection, intuition, meditation, imagination, and speculation starts of work. Eventually, the reasoning activity will lead to critical thinking. This is why philosophizing always involves questioning, analyzing, criticizing, synthesizing, evaluating and judging. Therefore, we can say that the spark of wonder is the dynamic force that leads to the progressive motion of the act of philosophizing. And, thus, philosophy begins when the mind seeks to know and understand the why' and how' of what it knows. Philosophy speculates the "WHY's of things.... Now, let us talk about the vernacular definition of philosophy. That limits the philosophy exclusively -- compared to other science -- is its ultimate foundation: reason. Of all sciences, philosophy prides itself as being the only science that investigates all things in their ultimate causes, reasons and principle through reason alone. This means that philosophy does not employ faith or highly scientific work done in laboratories. But this not means that philosophy is not present to theology and in any science whether they are done in laboratories or not. Since philosophy is the love of wisdom or "application of theory into practice", or "the act of seeing the reality holistically" -- which presuppose the total attention of the viewer -- then philosophy is present in all science For example, Theology cannot become substantial its expression without philosophy. This is why philosophy is known as "the handmaid of theology" or "the expression of theology". The only distinction is that philosophy sees the reality in the domain of reason alone while theology is the domain of faith and reason. Because of this, we may say that the beginning of theology is the end of philosophy or where philosophy ends theology begins. What about the presence of philosophy in other sciences? We hear things like "the philosophy of advertising", "the philosophy of selling", "the philosophy of education", "the philosophy of politics", "the philosophy of science", etc. What does philosophy means or imply in all these expression? If philosophy is "the love of wisdom" or the "quest of truth" then the meaning of philosophy in these usages is that it is the truth that explains that which is referred to as philosophy. In this light, we can that there is philosophy behind everything -- in everything that served as its basis or fundamental explanation. If philosophy -- compared to other sciences -- is a science that investigates all things in their ultimate causes, reasons and principle then it, by necessity, is a science that is not satisfied with skin -deep, superficial or partial treatment of reality. As the vernacular nominal definition of philosophy implies, philosophy inquires or investigates the substance of all realities whether they are spiritual or material, corporeal or incorporeal, organic or inorganic, sentient or insentient, rational or irrational. **THEORETICAL FIELD** PRACTICAL FIELD Philosophy's pride of being the only science which investigates all realities in their ultimate causes, reasons, and principles is justified in Metaphysics. Per se, Metaphysics is a science that studies all beings in so far as they are beings. This is falls under General Metaphysics or Ontology. In other words, Ontology is a metaphysical study of all realities in so far as they exist. But Metaphysics does not only studies being general, but also specially. It studies beings specially or specifically, when it studies the world (cosmology), God (Theodicy), and man (Psychology). This is why Cosmology is defined as a metaphysical science which studies the general nature of the world, while Theodicy or Natural Theology as a metaphysical science which studies the nature, operations, and attributes of God, and Psychology as a metaphysical science which treats of man's nature as a being endowed with reasons and intellect. When philosophy investigates knowledge and truth it is called Epistemology. When it studies correct processes of thinking, it is called Logic. And when it studies about the morality (goodness or badness) of human actions (conduct) it is called Ethics or Moral Philosophy. a. The Purpose of Philosophy The pleasure of philosophizing, thinking, reflecting, analyzing, evaluating, etc. is fulfillment or satisfaction alien to a person who has a narrow interest of reality. There is indeed a joy of philosophizing, a joy which only the pundits can experience. Philosophy enables us to understand *ourselves better* Philosophy helps us to understand *others, our fellowmen*; Philosophy helps us to understand *others' way of thinking*; Philosophy helps us to understand *the world and our place and role* in it; Philosophy helps us understand *the significance, meaning, value, and finality of human life; and* Philosophy helps us know and understand *God in his nature, essence, activities, and attributes.* Thus, philosophy will enable us to understand all things in their ultimate causes, reasons, and principles through human reason alone. However, we have to admit that to do philosophy is not an easy task. Philosophizing is a hard job since by its very nature philosophy in enigmatic; it is inscrutable. To do philosophy is to enter into the threshold if critical inquiry, analysis, and assessment. In this, we can say that philosophy does not make things easier. So why philosophize? We have to because it is our mission. In a way, God -- by giving us a mind -- consigns us to philosophize so that we can understand ourselves, others, the world, and Him **CHAPTER 4** **The Ends of the Human Act** Man does not act aimlessly. When he acts, it is because he enjoys the action, or because he wants to achieve something by that action**.** Pablito may play basketball because he enjoys it. Or he may play because he wants to qualify for the varsity team. **The End of an Act** What we call end is the purpose or goal of an act. It is that which completes or finishes an act. Distinction is made between end of the act and end of the doer or agent. The end of the act is the natural termination of an activity. The end of the eating is nourishment; that of reading is comprehension; that of basketball is scoring a goal, and that of jogging is physical exercise. The end of the doer is the personal purpose intended by the person performing the act. He who eats aims o satisfy his hunger; the reader, to relax himself; the basketball player, to win the game, and the jogger, to maintain physical fitness. The end of the doer is called the motive. The motive is the reason why a person performs an act. It is the force that sustains the act and brings it to completion **Kinds of Ends** The end of the doer is either 1. Proximate or Remote End 2. Intermediate or Ultimate End 1. The proximate end is the purpose which a doer wishes to accomplish immediately by his action. The remote end is the purpose which a doer wishes to accomplish in a series of acts. The proximate end of eating is the satisfaction of hunger. Its remote end is the promotion of health. 2. The ultimate end is the purpose which is desired for its own sake and not because of something else. The intermediate end is the purpose which is desired as a means for obtaining another thing. The attainment of an ultimate end completes an act and stops all further acts. The attainment of an intermediate end leads either to another intermediate end or to an ultimate end. A student may assign his graduation as an ultimate end. The intermediate end, is the case, would consists in all of these activities leading towards graduation, such as attending classes, taking exams, participating in recitation, and so on. A series of separate actions finds meaning in their relation to an ultimate end or goal. This I fundamentally true with life itself. Living consists of all human activities. Viewed in their entirety. All human activities are tendencies towards the ultimate purpose of life itself. This ultimate end of life is happiness. **Action and Motivation** Alfredo Panizo gives us the opportunity to cite principles concerning human action. 1. Every agent that performs an action act for the sake of an end or purpose to be attained. Man is an motivate animal. For him to act, he must first find the motive to act. Sometimes the motive comes instantaneously, as when one stands up to answer the doorbell. Sometimes, the motive comes out from tedious and well calculated efforts, as a business. Sometimes, the motive is provoked by selfishness and malice. At other times, it is inspired by love and concern for others. Whichever way, motives give life to action. Without it man finds no reason why he must act at all. 2. Every agent acts towards an ultimate end. The ultimate end is that on account of which man decides to act. It is what is desired through the action. It is what confers meaning to an activity. The concept of motive implies that there is something important to be achieved. No sane person would waste his time sitting in a bus simply because he does not want to go anywhere. When someone takes a bus, we may rightly assume that he wants to go someplace: his ultimate destination. Similarly, and in all his actions, man seeks an ultimate purpose. 3. Every agent has the power to move himself towards an end which he finds suitable for him. The end is the motivation of an act. But only what is good can motivate man to act. Therefore, the end of an act is something which the doer perceives to be "suitable" to him. Only what is good can be suitable to man, because it does not belong to man's nature to desire evil for its own sake. An end then is synonymous with the concept of "good". **End as Something Good** Nothing excites he human appetite or rational desire than that which is good. Because something is good, it becomes the object of desire and, therefore, desirable. Actions are tendencies towards something good. Thus, what is good and desirable is also the end of the act. The concept of end coincides with that of good. Accordingly, Aristotle says that "good" means either of these: good as an end in itself and good as a means (intermediate end) to another end. Apparent good. Man has a natural aversion to evil. Evil is never desirable for its own sake. It is naturally repugnant to man. When someone desires evil as an end, it is only because he views it, subjectively, as something good. Evil viewed as good is called apparent good. It is evil disguised as good. It is deceptively tempting and many fall for it. As suitor who kills his rival hi immoral action as a "good" means to rid himself of a rival for the love of a woman. Every human activity is intended for the attainment of something good. This good must be objectively genuine, not merely an apparent good. "Unfortunately,", as a free agent, man is able to set his choice on mere apparent goods and false values." **The Meaning of Good** The word "good has varied shades of meaning. Aristotle defines it as that which fits a function. The good of man is that which fits his function as a rational being. And because it is the soul that which constitutes man's rational nature, "the good of man prove to be activity of soul in conformity with excellence; and if there is more than one excellence, it will be the best and the most complete of these. (Aristotle: 293) A thinker once wrote that human beings have their needs, while individual humans have their wants. Needs are those goods which are essential to man as man. Without them, man is incomplete and underdeveloped. Wants are those goods that an individual requires because of his particular circumstances in life. Obviously, the needs must first be fulfilled before the wants. The good that fits man as man are the needs of his rational nature. All other needs, such as the biological and social, while they are similarly required, are subordinate to the rational needs. **Kinds of Goods** 1. Essential and Accidental. Those that fit the natural needs of man as man are essential good. Such good include food, shelter, health, knowledge, virtue, and life. Those that fit the wants of an individual because of his circumstances are accidental good. Such include money, car, good name, academic degree, power, and luxury, and many more. Essential good is also called perspective because they contribute to the integral perfections of man. Accidentals good, on the other hand, are called non-perfective because they merely contribute to the external worth or appearance of a person. 2. Real and Apparent. A real good is something which has an intrinsic value. Thus, we call it: value. It possesses qualities rendering it "fitting" or desirable. Examples of real good are good acts and habits, parents and parenthood, pleasure and joy, work and leisure, etcetera. The real good includes both essential and accidental goods. An apparent good is actually an evil thing but is viewed as "good" under certain aspects. Examples are diseases, sadness, death, worry, crimes, etcetera. 3. Perfective and Non-perfective good. Perfective good is that which contributes to the integral perfection of a person, such as: education, virtue, food, exercise, medicine. Non-perfective good is the that which merely contributes to the external appearance or convenience of a person, such as: clothes. Wealth, social status, political; power, etc. 4. Perfect and imperfect good. Also called unlimited or limited good respectively, or absolute and relative goods. Perfect good has the fullest of qualities enabling it to fully satisfy human desire. Imperfect good possesses only certain qualities so that it does not fully satisfy human desire except in relative or limited sense. All "earthly" goods are imperfect. Only God, in the absolute sense, is perfect good. **The Greatest Good** In every activity, man seeks that which is good. The greatest good as matter of fact. This is evident in our concern for the best in everything; best friends, best parents, best food, best performance, best job and so forth. In the language pf the philosophers, the greatest good is the *Summum Bonum*. For Aristotle, the greatest good is happiness. Happiness is what man aims to achieve in all his activities. The ultimate purpose of life is the attainment of happiness. As psychological state, happiness is the feeling of contentment arising from the possession of a good. As a state of being, it is the perfection arising from the possession of the good. Happiness coming from the possession of the greatest good constitute man's perfection. Now, which is the greatest good? What wonderful thing is there the possession of which will fully and absolutely satisfy human desire so that nothing more remains to be desired? If the greatest good does not exist, or if it does but is totally beyond man's grasp, then human life would be pointless. Ethics explains the best answer to this one fundamental question of life. **Some errors concerning happiness**: 1. Some people give the impression hat money or wealth can buy happiness. This is tragic because money merely feeds the bottomless appetite of greed. Money, besides, is aptly considered the root of all evil, because it gives a false sense of power. The fact is that riches beget worry, selfish competition, waste, oppression, and all other forms of injustices. If the Bible is to be believed, the avarice of the rich makes it very difficult for him to enter heaven. The camel may pass easily through the eye of a needle, but not the rich who has grown much bigger because of pride. 2. Some people equate health with happiness. Of course, health is a prerequisite to a productive life. But there is the sick who are at the same time happy. The present-day preoccupation with physical fitness may not be wrong. But he who invests happiness in the beauty and agility of the human anatomy might not have much to look forward to when age catches up with him. It is wonderful to be strong and healthy, but happiness is somewhere else. 3. Sensual people vainly seeks happiness in earthly pleasure. But one may not indulge in all the pleasures of this word without ending up with pain. Nature shows how overeating, for instance, cause the stomach to ache. And some people are simply wasting away because of their imprudent indulgence in liquor, tobacco, or sex. Pleasures of the body are poor copy of the true lasting happiness that man longs for. Certainly, an animal who has a rational soul deserves a better fate than AIDS or cancer. 4. Certain people cling to their public image as if God Himself was made after their illusion. Surrounded by an adoring crowd, these popular personages exhibit the exuberance of being "super". Putting themselves above the ordinary folk. And, yet fame and fortune are fragile as the mirror that reflects their vanity. 5. Some dedicate their lives to science and arts. Doubtlessly, the science and the arts are essential to man's development. They are however the means rather than the end in themselves. They are precisely instruments leading to the promotion of human well-being. The same can be said of virtue. 6. Some propose that the final purpose of man is the promotion of the State or Government. While man is sociable and needs the State to regulate his social, political and economic relations, the good of the individual comes ahead of that of the State. Thus, the ideal State does not sacrifice the well-being of its members. Precisely, it is the function of government to make possible the happiness of its members or citizens. **Natural and Supernatural Happiness** Natural happiness is that which is attainable by man through the use of his natural powers. Supernatural happiness is that which is attainable by man through the use of his natural powers these are informed and aided by God's infusion of grace. Supernatural Happiness is a study belonging properly to Moral Theology. We may mention in passing the supernatural happiness consists in "beatific vision" of God. Natural Happiness "consists in the perfection that can be attained by man through the employment of his body and soul and the powers inherent in them: intellect, will internal and external sensory powers, the sense appetites, locomotion, nutrition, and growth. For Aristotle, it was obvious that happiness does not rest on one single good object. Rather, it consists in the attainment of all those things that are essential to human growth and development. These goods, however, must be ranked in a hierarchy: from the lowest level to the highest level. Complete happiness, in the natural order, consists in those goods pertaining to the soul; "but some of the other goods must necessarily be there, with others, which are by nature tools, cooperating and of use toward other ends. The highest good, according to Aristotle, belongs to the intellect: the contemplation of truth. But this fullness of knowledge is attained through virtue. **The Ultimate Purpose** Aristotle does not go beyond earthy life in his dissertation on the last or ultimate end of man. Christian philosopher's, notably St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, teach that man, in every deliberate action act toward an end, and ultimately, to an absolutely ultimate end: happiness. Since man's desire and tendency towards happiness is unlimited, nothing short of the Absolutely Perfect Good can satisfy it perfectly. Therefore God, the Infinite Good, is the greatest good, or "*summum bonum*", to be attained as the ultimate end. Man cannot attain perfect happiness in this life, because God can never be known perfectly by man's natural powers. But man can approximate perfect happiness in this life by knowledge and love of God and by the exercise of virtue. DR. AB. ADENA Professor