Ethics Textbook PDF

1|P age  It has been a great pleasure that the three thinkers of different fields come together to compile and arrange a module in Ethics that can be used by students studying the subject Ethics. These three persons use their own pen name as part of their ways in presenting their field and int...

1|P age  It has been a great pleasure that the three thinkers of different fields come together to compile and arrange a module in Ethics that can be used by students studying the subject Ethics. These three persons use their own pen name as part of their ways in presenting their field and interest. The Thinker. He believes to be one of those who are called Thinker by people since he has the habit of thinking on the nature of things, whether action or object. He is not satisfied with just getting into essence of things; he even asks himself if the nature of his thinking is right and logically structured to reach a valid conclusion. He continues to think what he thinks, validating and examining the derivations of his line of thinking just to make sure his conclusions are plausible and logical. The Pragmatist. This aspiring philosopher is true to his name for he believes that a thing can only be of value, useful and meaningful if that thing will have a practical bearing to a person’s living. He believes that the act of helping can only be good if it is seen in acting than on the principles behind its language meaning. He believes that teaching is not necessarily good if there is no application that can be seen as a good act. He is a true pragmatist for he believes that the meaning of conceptions is to be sought in their practical bearings, that the functions of thought is to guide action, and that truth is preeminently to be tested by the practical consequences of belief. 2|P age The Moralist. He is the key figure on this module for he checks if all the arguments and thinking of the two aspiring philosophers are suitable and applicable to morality. He believes on the value of goodness than on the value of thinking. However, he is somehow influenced by Nietzsche for he believes that love goes beyond good and evil. He believes that the basic requirement of goodness is love and that evil can only be conquered through love. 3|P age  A Module Book in Ethics This is a Module book in Ethics. This book will be your guide to know right from wrong, good from bad. It will help you understand how humans ought to live. As a requirement also in the New General Education curriculum, the content of the subject will be aligned to the syllabus on Ethics, taken from CMO no. 20 series of 2013. Ethics deals with principles of ethical behavior in modern society at the level of the person, society and in interaction with the environment and other shared resources (CMO 20 s 2013). As it is compliant with CMO 20 s 2013, the structure of the book is organized according to the three elements of moral experience. Introduction. Basic Concepts of Ethics 1st Element or Chapter 1. The Moral Agent including context – cultural, communal and environmental 2nd Element or Chapter 2. The Act. 3rd Element or Chapter 3. Reason or Framework (for the act) Normative Ethics and Metaethics. Chapter 4. The Different Applications of Ethics Conclusion. The application in the continued Globalization and Religion’s Influence Introduction. This is the chapter wherein the basic concepts of ethics have been introduced such that the students may understand their functions, roles, and application in Ethics. 4|P age The Moral Agent. This chapter focuses on the human person as the moral agent. It introduces the three sources of authority which are also the basis of a moral standard. Furthermore, instead of putting an element of human acts and the determinants of Morality, I intentionality put it in the Moral Agent since it is important to understand them first before going into the discussion of cultural relativism. This topic discusses how culture influences when shaping one’s moral behavior. Included on this part is the idea that despite the fact that culture shapes our moral behavior, we should not treat culture as the ultimate determining values, as if, all that culture made us are always right and good. It would eventually make us understand our own culture as Filipinos; this gives us a better an understanding about the Filipino culture, wherein as Filipinos, our culture somehow influence us on how we make moral decisions, moral judgments and our own moral reasoning. Finally, the chapter culminates in the discussion of the stages of moral development. The Act. This chapter will discuss the role of feelings/emotions in making a moral decision. It further presents the pros and cons of relying on feelings in making such decisions. Finally, it will delve into the discussion of the process of making reasoned and impartial decisions. This would clarify why reason alone is not enough in carrying out a moral decision. The Reason or Framework (Normative Ethics and Metaethics). This chapter will discuss the different ethical frameworks/principles that a human person can use in making moral decisions or even in reaching a moral judgment from a certain moral situation. This would lead us to understand the different frameworks that we are using in reaching a moral 5|P age decision. Thus, it would lead us to know what personal framework we can use in making moral decisions. The Applied Ethics. This chapter is a special chapter that was introduced in the book since this chapter portrays the different applications of Ethics in different sectors of our society. It introduces students to the field of medical ethics like abortion, business ethics, environmental ethics and animal rights. Conclusion. This chapter culminates in the discussion on Ethics. It asks about the challenges to ethical behavior in today’s world. It will try to clarify if the search for universal values has still a meaning. It also introduces the role of religion in ethics. It tries to answer the question of how we respond to an increasingly pluralist and individualist globalized world. Thus, as stipulated in the CHED Ethics curriculum guide (CMO 20 s 2013), at the end of the semester, the student must be able to: 1. Differentiate between moral and non-moral problems 2. Describe what a moral experience is as it happens in different levels of human existence. 3. Explain the influence of Filipino culture on the way students look at a moral experience and solve moral dilemmas. 4. Describe the elements of moral development and moral experience. 5. Use ethical frameworks and principles to analyze moral experiences. 6. Make sound ethical judgment based on principles, facts, and stakeholders affected. 7. Develop sensitivity to the common good. 6|P age 8. Understand and internalize the principle of ethical behavior in modern society at the level of the person, society, and interaction with the environment and other shared resources 7|P age  This book is both a compilation and a result of research. However, the content of this book cannot just be attributed to the authors since many discussions are results of compilation. Furthermore, this book is intended to be used in compliance with the CHED Memo no 20 series of 2013. Thus, the book’s content is very much patterned to the Ethics Syllabus with additional discussion on Applied Ethics. 8|P age  “You are mistaken my friend if you think that a man who is worth anything ought to spend his time weighing up the prospects of life and death. He has only one thing to consider in performing any action — that is, whether he is acting right or wrongly, like a good man or a bad one.” -Socrates 9|P age The Trio _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1 Preface Page _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 4 Foreword_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 8 Table of Contents_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 10 Introduction_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 12 Lesson 1: What is Ethics? Why do we need to study it? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _13 Lesson 2: Nature of Ethics_ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _16 Lesson 3: The Basic Concepts of Ethics _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __25 Chapter 1: The Moral Agent_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ 36 Lesson 1: The Three Sources of Authority_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _36 Lesson 2: Elements of Human Acts and Determinants of Morality_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 42 Lesson 3: How culture shapes our moral behavior?_ _ _ _ _ _ _47 Lesson 4: Cognitive and Ethical Relativism_ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ 49 Lesson 5: The Filipino culture, traits, and values_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __59 Lesson 6: How is Moral Character developed? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ 64 Lesson 7: Stages of Moral Development_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __68 Lesson 8: What Motivates People to Behave Ethically?_ _ _ _ _71 Chapter 2: The Human Act_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _103 Lesson 1: The Role of Feelings in the Decision-Making Process_ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 103 Lesson 2: Reason and Impartiality as Requirements for Ethics_ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 113 Lesson 3: Moral Courage_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 117 Chapter 3: Ethical Frameworks and Principles_ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ 120 Lesson 1: Virtue Ethics_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 121 10 | P a g e  Lesson 2: Natural Law Ethics_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __124 Lesson 3: Duty Ethics_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 130 Lesson 4: Consequentialist Ethics_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 136 Lesson 5: Justice Ethics_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __147 Lesson 6: Metaethics_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _152 Chapter 4: The Applied Ethics_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _178 Lesson 1: Business Ethics_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ 185 Lesson 2: Bioethics_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 194 Lesson 3: Moral Standing and Personhood_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 208 Lesson 3: Professional Ethics_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 212 Lesson 3: Environmental Ethics_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _221 Chapter 5: Conclusion in Ethics_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _226 Lesson 1: Moral Challenges of Globalization_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 226 Lesson 2: Millenials and “Fillenials”: Ethical Challenges and Responses_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ __233 Lesson 3: Difference between Ethics and Religion_ _ _ _ _ _ _236 References_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _238 11 | P a g e  Ethics is derived from the Greek word ethos which means “characteristic way of acting”. Its Latin equivalent, which is also taken from the word morality, is mos, mores, meaning “tradition or custom”. Ethos includes cultural mannerisms, religion, politics, laws and social aspirations of a group of people. 1 Ethics and Morals Compared and Contrasted What are they? Ethics pertains to the rules of conduct recognized in respect to a particular class of human actions or a particular group or culture. On the other hand, morals refer to the principles or habits with respect to right or wrong conduct. While morals also prescribe the dos and dont’s, morality is ultimately a personal compass of right and wrong. Where are they come from and why we do it? Ethics comes from external, from the social system while morals are internal and rooted from the individual. We uphold ethics then because society says it is the right thing to do while on morals, we espouse morals because we believe in something being right or wrong. What are their origin and acceptability? Ethics comes from the Greek word ethos meaning “character” while morals come from the Latin word “mos” or “mores” meaning “custom.” Ethics are governed by 1 This text is taken directly from the book of Ramon B. Agapay entitled as Ethics and the Filipino: A Manual on Morals for Students and Educators, published 1991 12 | P a g e professional and legal guidelines within a particular time and place. Morality, on the other hand, transcends cultural norms. Lesson 1: What is Ethics? Why do we study it? To synthesize, We might say that ethics and morals are different but their difference is mostly rooted in its origin and application but more importantly, if we talk about ethics, we go back to talk about morality. Thus, borrowing from the word of Agapay (1991), “Ethics is defined as the science of the morality of human acts”2. It embodies the moral understanding of every human person on their human actions as to the standard of right and wrong that an individual picks up from the society. It is a science because it is a systematic body of knowledge, a knowledge of morality and principles of ethical behavior. Its object is human acts because human actions are those performed by humans, knowingly and freely. They are also called deliberate or intentional actions or voluntary actions. Morality, also, is the quality of human acts by which they are constituted as good, bad or indifferent.3 Why do we study Ethics and its importance? Imagine that you are confronted with a certain moral dilemma, in which you need to make a very difficult situation, one starts to go back to how deep and wide is one’s moral compass. Our moral experience teaches us to have a better understanding of morality and to widen our moral compass. 2 Ibid 3 This text is taken directly from the book of Ramon B. Agapay entitled as Ethics and the Filipino: A Manual on Morals for Students and Educators, published 1991 4 Adapted and revised from Ethics by Gallinero, et.al., 2018 13 | P a g e  Let us consider this example, Suppose you are a marketing supervisor of a certain company. You were asked to write a report about a certain marketing subject but some details about the report are at the hands of your constituent. Since that constituent has already gone home, the only way that you could reach him is through contracting him through his mobile or telephone. However, no matter how much you try to reach him, he is always cannot be reached. Then, you remember that you were able to peak at the password and email of that constituent unintentionally yesterday. You know that if you open his email, your problem with your report will be easily solved, however, you also know that if you open the email without permission, you are already violations the company’s rules. Unfortunately, you don’t have other means to fulfill your obligation so you open the email of your constituent to get the details for the report. As you browse on the email, you saw something terrible, your constituent is making anomalous transactions in the company’s name. You thought of reporting him but it somewhat holds you back not to do it because you will be caught violating the policy of each employee, yet you cannot also be still since you knew better than anyone that this constituent of yours is doing anomalous transactions without t he company’s knowledge. Now, what maybe is your decision? (Gallinero, et.al.)4 When confronted with this situation, your moral compass will be tested and your moral standard will be checked. In this case, your decision is not anymore based on a subjective perspective of what morality is, more importantly, you need to employ “ethical principles” by which your basis is at the present time, the modern society, and from there you would consider that it should be at the level of person, society and in interaction with the environment and other shared resources. As Gallinero et.al. puts it, “understanding your moral compass in order to develop better judgment is the aim for studying ethics.” Students cannot be a tabularasa, devoid of pre-existing 14 | P a g e beliefs; instead “the students have developed set of moral standards by which they use to understand the world and a moral compass to navigate in it.4 Relevance of Studying Ethics in your Chosen Profession5 Ethics ensure a generally agreed standard of work-related behavior that empowers professionals to foster moral values through their work. Ethics gives a sense of justification in one’s judgement, and helps ensure that decisions at work are not made based on purely subjective factors. Without the study of Ethics, the practice of one’s profession will fall prey to vastly conflicting individual interpretations. Importance of Rules to Social Beings6 Humans do not live alone in the world. They are sometimes called social beings because they live in society. The reason why each human agreed to live with each other is because of co-existence. They need to co-exist in the society so that there should be balance and harmony. However, this co- existence will only be possible if there is a system that guides and helps them work together as one community. Others call this kind of system as “rules”. It is usually found in law and other rules that govern a certain action of a certain society. Because of this so –called “rules” humans are able to co-exist with each other, with the environment and other shared resources or entities. “In the simplest sense, rule is defined as “a statement that tells you what is or what is not allowed in a particular situation” (Merriam-Webster, © 2017). Company Policy Rules regulates the employees to live and work together despite their 4 Gallinero, et.al. (2018) Ethics.Mutya Publishing House, Inc.: Malabon City 5 Ibid, p. 4 6 Ibid, p.4 15 | P a g e differences in perspectives and upbringing. This Company Policy Rules made possible harmony and balance between employees and employers. Lesson 2: Nature of Ethics7 a. Definition of Ethics and other terms about Morality b. The Material and Formal Object of Ethics c. Morality vs Etiquette, Law and Religion d. Division of Ethics e. Approaches to the Study of Ethics f. Types of Norms a. Nature and Definition of Ethics As being discussed in the introductory part of the lesson, ethics comes from the Greek word ethos which pertains to character and custom. This would also mean that ethics both deals with a group’s ethical conduct and individual conduct. While it may be said that Ethics deals with human conduct, all that is outside human conducts, like animal behavior and non-moral activities cannot be part of Ethics. Hence, it is important to discuss the two terms used to identify an activity that is not part of ethics. We have amoral and nonmoral. “Amoral means having no moral sense or being indifferent to right and wrong. 8 Some people belong to this category more specifically those who had prefrontal lobotomies tend to act amorally after the operation; they do not have a sense of right and wrong. Another people who are part of amoral group are the babies since they don’t have moral sense. The second word is nonmoral. This means that they are out of the 77 The discussion on this topic was taken directly from Padilla, Reynaldo A. (2019). Ethics: A Textbook for the New General Education Curriculum. Books Atbp. Publishing Corp.: Mandaluyong City 8 Padilla, Reynaldo A. (2019). Ethics: A Textbook for the New General Education Curriculum. Books Atbp. Publishing Corp.: Mandaluyong City 16 | P a g e realm of morality. Examples of these are the inanimate objects such toys, books, bicycle and guns. They can neither be moral nor immoral. Thus, even if one uses guns to kill a person, the gun cannot be called immoral but only the person using it. Definition of Ethics9 Ethics deals with the study of moral behavior or conduct of humans as viewed from the ultimate principles insofar as these principles are known by human reason. Briefly, ethics is a philosophical science that deals with the study of the morality of human acts. The following can be drawn definitions from the general definition above; 1. Ethics is the science of human acts with reference to right and wrong. 2. Ethics is the study of the rectitude of human conduct. 3. Ethics is the scientific inquiry into the principles of morality. 4. Ethics is the practical science of the morality of the human actions. Thus, Ethics guides the intellect in the acquisition and application of moral principles. Not only does Ethics point out the way to right living, just as the signposts on the road indicate the right direction to a place, but it also compels humans to follow the directions to his ultimate destiny. Hence, Ethics likewise guides the will in its search for what is good. The Material and the Formal Object of Ethics 1. The material object of Ethics consists of human acts. Human acts performed by a human person – acts in which his superior faculties of both intellect and will are used – as 9 Taken directly from the book Ethics: a Textbook for the New General Education Curriculum by Reynaldo A. Padilla, PhD 17 | P a g e  opposed to those acts which humans perform in common with animal and vegetative life. 2. The formal object of Ethics is the moral rectitude of humans’ acts in relation to humans’ natural end. 3. Ethical conclusions. In order to reach its conclusions, Ethics draws upon the following sources: a. Human reason (its primary source) b. Experience (contemporary and historical) b.1. Personal experience b.2. Experience of others Morality VS Etiquette, Law and Religion Etiquette refers to any special code of behavior or courtesy. In our society, for example, it is usually considered bad etiquette to eat with one’s fingers while attending a formal dinner or to use obscene language in public. It is always good to say thank you when receiving and please when requesting. It is common place to judge people’s manners as good and bad and the conduct that reflects them as right or wrong. In the context when a person is conducting inappropriately in a certain social situation, his/her acts expresses judgements about manners, not ethics, about matters of taste, not of morality. The so-called rules of etiquette that we learned at home and school are prescriptions for socially acceptable behavior. If we want to fit in, get along with others, and be thought well of by them, we should observe common rules of etiquette. If you violate the rules, then you are rightly considered ill-mannered or uncivilized, but not necessarily immoral. 18 | P a g e  Rules of etiquette are generally non-moral assertions: Give the groom your congratulations, but the bride your best wishes; Push your chair back into place upon leaving a dinner table. But what is considered bad taste can also raise a moral question. The male boss who refers to female subordinates as honey, doll, darling, or sweetie pie shows bad manners. If such epithets diminish the worth of female employees or perpetuate sexism, then they also raise moral issues concerning equal treatment and denial of dignity to human beings. Law Four Kinds of Law 1. Statutes are laws enacted by legislative bodies. The law that prohibits touching people without their consent (battery) is a statute. Statutes comprise a large part of the law and are what many of us mean when we speak of laws. 2. Regulations. Limited in their knowledge, legislatures often set up boards and agencies, whose functions include issuing detailed regulations of certain kinds of conduct – administrative regulations. For example, state legislatures establish license boards to formulate regulations for their licensing of physicians and nurses. 3. Common Law refers to laws applied in the English- speaking world before there were any statutes. Courts frequently wrote opinions explaining the bases of their decisions in specific case, including the legal principles they deemed appropriate. Each of these opinions became a precedent for later decisions in similar cases. Over the years, a massive body of legal principles accumulated is 19 | P a g e  collectively referred to as common law. Like administrative regulations, common law is valid if it harmonizes with statutory law and with still another kind, constitutional law. 4. Constitutional law. The Philippine Constitution enshrines the observance of the principle of powers and the system of checks and balances among the legislative, the executive and the judiciary departments. Constitutional law defines the relationship of these three entities within a state. Is the law, whatever its source, always a reliable standard for determining moral behavior? It is, if and only if; 1. What is legal is always moral, and 2. What is not prohibited by laws is always moral. But both of these propositions, however, are untrue. Regarding the first – that what is legal is necessarily moral – let us consider an actual of a four-month old baby suffering from diarrhea and fever. The family physician prescribed a medication on the second day of the fever and continued to give check up on the baby on the third day. However, the family physician was out of reach on the fourth day because of some important reasons and by that day also, the condition of the baby had worsened. So, the parents do not have a choice but to bring the baby in the nearest emergency hospital. However, they have a policy in their place that they cannot accept any patient if the patient, under the care of a certain physician, cannot give consent from the physician. Thus, the parents denied of emergency treatment, had to go home but later on lost their child’s life. 20 | P a g e So examining on the situation, it appears that by the law and policy of their place, the hospital had no legal responsibility over the case of the patient since there were no legal violations that the hospital had committed. However, the hospital was also morally responsible for its failure to save life just because of a policy. In the second proposition – what is not expressly prohibited by law is always moral? Let us use an example about a man driving in the street. He saw someone bleeding after an accident and he knew he could help the man because he just finished his first aid training. Should he stop to help the man? Legally speaking, the man driving has no obligation to stop and offer aid. However, under common law, anyone is expected someone who is in need more especially if that person has capacity and ability to aid that someone. But even if that man driving sped away without rendering aid, his behavior would still be perfectly legal, yet he is a moral suspect. Religion10 Another important aspect is the discussion about ethics is related to religion. While many people identify morality with religion, both are being concerned with right and wrong behavior. In fact, most religions have a long history of internal arguments and interpretations about the nature and content of the moral law. 10 This discussion is taken from Ethics Deciding what is right and wrong by Apolinar Henry Fernandez together with Emmanuel Grumo and Eric Reambonanza 21 | P a g e  However, as being mentioned ethics solely as philosophical disciplined, relies on human reason, logic and human experience while religion on the other hand, relies primarily and mainly on supernatural reason, that is – divine revelation or divine authority. Another thing, the practice of morality need not be motivated by religion considerations. However, most of the commandments of religions are drawn from the ambit of moral principles. Division of Ethics Ethics has two major parts: 1. General Ethics presents truths about human acts, and from these truths deduce the general principles of morality. 2. Special Ethics is applied ethics. It applies the principles of General Ethics in different departments of human activity, individual and social. It is divided into: a. Individual Ethics a.1. As regards to God a.2. As regards to self a.3. As regards to fellowmen b. Social Ethics b.1. In the family b.2. In the state b.3. In the world (International Ethics) Approaches to the Study of Morality There are two major approaches to the study of morality: 1. The scientific or descriptive approach is most often used in the social sciences, which emphasizes observation of human behavior and conduct, and the positing 22 | P a g e  conclusions based on those observations. The emphasis here is empirical; that is, social scientists observe and collect data about human behavior and conduct and then draw conclusions. For example, psychologists, after having observed many human beings often act in their own self-interest. This is a descriptive scientific approach to human behavior – the psychologists have observed how human beings act in many situations, have described what they have observed and have drawn conclusions. 2. The philosophical approach has two parts, the first of which is nearly the opposite of the scientific or descriptive approach. It is referred to as normative or prescriptive ethics, that is, as having to do with norms and prescriptions. Using the example that human beings often act in their own self-interest, normative ethical philosophers would go beyond the description and conclusion of the psychologists and want to know whether human beings should or ought to act in their own self-interest. They might even go further and come up with a definite conclusion, for example, “Given these arguments and this evidence, human beings should always act in their own self- interest” (egoism). Or they might say, “Human beings should always act in the interest of others” (altruism), or “Human beings should always act in the interest of all concerned, self-included” (utilitarianism). These three conclusions are no longer merely descriptions but prescriptions; that is, the statements are prescribing how human beings should behave, not merely describing how they do in fact behave. The second part of the philosophical approach to the study of ethics is called metaethics or, sometimes, analytic ethics. Rather than being descriptive or prescriptive, this 23 | P a g e  approach is analytic in two ways. First, meta-ethicists analyze ethical language (for example, what we mean when we use the word good). Second, they analyze the rational foundations for ethical systems or the logic ad reasoning of various ethicists. Metaethicists do not prescribe anything, nor do they deal directly with normative systems. Instead, they go beyond (a key meaning for the Greek physics meta), concerning themselves only indirectly with normative ethical systems by concentrating on reasoning, logical structures and language rather than on content.11 Types of Norms According to Reyes, upon closer analysis of the various meanings of the expression “what is proper,” or “what is good and right” and other similar expressions, “we can (identify and differentiate) at least four types of norms or standards within (what he calls as) the ethos or mores of a community. 1. Technical Norm – this refers mainly to man’s needs which come from his bodily space-time limitations. This norm has to do with survival, health and well-being. It is concerned with problems of effecting change, of transforming the natural world, the problems of coping with natural forces. Thus, this norm is concerned with the techniques of (how certain things pertaining to survival, among others, should be done or not done.) 2. Societal norm – This particular type of norm has something to do with the need for group cohesion and for 11 This part of the topic is taken directly from Ethics A Textbook for the New General Education Curriculum by Reynaldo A. Padilla, PhD 24 | P a g e  strengthening the bonds that keep the community together. In relation to this norm, for example, certain manners or attire, certain ways of speaking or of conducting oneself, certain rituals and ceremonies are considered ‘proper’ and ‘fitting’ or ‘appropriate’ or ‘recommended,’ because they maintain and strengthen the bonds that keep the community together. 3. Aesthetic Norm – This refers to typical perceptual forms regarding color, shape, space, movement, sound, feeling emotion, touch and texture, taste, scent and odor, which are considered by the community as ‘ennobling,’ ‘cathartic,’ ‘heightening man’s existence,’ or ‘beautiful,’ because they represent a certain free play and celebration of the human spirit. 4. Ethical or Moral Norm – The moral (or ethical) norm refers to some ideal vision of a human person, an ideal stage or perfection of his/her being, which serves as the ultimate goal and norm. In relation to this kind of norm, the human person and his/her actions are judged to be right or wrong, good or bad. Lesson 3: The Basic Concepts of Ethics a. Moral vs non-moral standards b. What are dilemmas? (Moral dilemmas)? c. Three levels of moral dilemmas (individual, organizational, systemic/structural) d. Foundation of morality: Freedom-responsibility for one’s act and to others e. Moral Dimension of Human Existence a. Moral Standards vs Non-moral Standards Moral standards 25 | P a g e   Moral standards involve the rules people have about the kinds of actions they believe are morally right and wrong, as well as the values they place on the kinds of objects they believe are morally good and morally bad. Some ethicists equate moral standards with moral values and moral principles. O Example of Moral standard: “Thou shall not kill” While non-moral standards  Non-moral standards refer to rules that are unrelated to moral or ethical considerations. Either these standards are not necessarily linked to morality or by nature lack ethical sense. Basic examples of non-moral standards include rules of etiquette, fashion standards, rules in games, and various house rules. O Example of non-moral standard: Moving three steps without dribbling is a “travelling violation” Moral Experience and Moral Dilemma Moral Experience “A moral experience is any encounter wherein a person understands that the values he/she believes to be important are either realized or thwarted.” 12 This concept of moral experience, however, asserts that the encounter is not limited to situations fraught with ethical questions, but that moral experience happens even in mundane everyday settings wherein you take action based on your moral standards. For instance, when you decide to give a poor person some money because you feel that it is the right thing to do, is a moral experience.13 12 Hunt, M.R., and F. A. Carnevale. “Moral Experience: A Framework for Bioethics Research.” Journal of Medical Ethics 37.11 (2011: 658-62. Web. 13 Gallinero, W.et.al.(2018) Ethics. Mutya Publishing House: Malabon City, p. 2 26 | P a g e Six Characteristics of Moral Standards14 1. Moral standards involve behaviors that seriously affect people’s well-being. It can either profoundly injure or benefit a person or persons. For example, lying, stealing, and killing are actions that hurt people. While treating people with respect and kindness uplifts them. 2. Moral standards take a more important consideration than other standards including self-interest. For example, because trust is important to you than revenge you refuse to expose your friend’s terrible secret even though she offended you. 3. Moral standards do not depend on any external authority but in how the person perceives the reasonableness of the action. For example, you will not copy your classmate’s answers during the exam not because your teacher will fail you if you do, but because you personally believe cheating is wrong and demeaning to you as a student. 4. Moral standards are believed to be universal. Thus, when you truly believe an act is wrong, you also will not agree or consent when other people commit what you consider a wrongful act. On the other hand, if you believe an action is morally right, then you will also support other people doing such acts. For example, you believe lying is wrong therefore you will also not agree when is not telling the truth. On the other hand, you tend to trust the person whom you know as someone who is true to his/her word. 5. Moral standards are based on objectivity. This means what you consider as right or wrong does not depend on whether the action advances the interest of particular 14 Ibid, p. 6. Taken directly from the afore-cited source 27 | P a g e  person or group, but your action depends on a universal standpoint where everyone’s interest is counted as equal. 6. Moral standards are associated with vocabulary that depicts emotion or feelings. For example, when you go against your moral standards you will say you feel guilty, remorseful or ashamed. You may describe your behavior as immoral or sinful. If you see other people going against your moral standards you feel indignant or perhaps disgusted with that person. What is the advantage of owning moral standards over merely abiding by moral standards?15 TriBEEia For most people, the fundamental moral question is, “What should I do?” or “How should I act?” Ethics presumed as moral rules on how a person should act. For example, “every person is obliged to act in ways that upholds the human dignity for all people.” Moral principles like these guide the practice of various professions (professional ethics). But is that all there is to ethics? Is ethics just about following rules of do’s and dont’s? This obsession with rules somehow neglects the more important aspects of being a human person and that is becoming what you should be. In other words, the more important question for ethics is not “What should I do?” but “What kind of person I should be?” The answer on this question leads us to understand that owning moral standards, living on it, than just abiding by it, helps humans understand what kind of person he/she should be. 15 Ibid, p. 7-8 28 | P a g e Moral Dilemma vs Dilemma By definition, dilemma is defined as “a situation in which you have to make a difficult choice” (Merriam-Webster, © 2017). Hence, when you are in a situation wherein you are confronted with a problem and the solution itself gives you a hard time which you will choose, then you are in a dilemma. Example of it is when you are out of cash even if it’s not due yet to send you allowance (for students) or to get your salary (for those who are working already), you need to make a choice whether to borrow a money from your friends or family or you would just suffer and wait for your allowance (if you are a student) or wait for your salary (if you are working). While a moral dilemma is a situation in which, whatever choice is made, the agent commits a moral wrong. To explain further moral dilemma, here are some tips to understand it better. A moral dilemma is a situation where16: 1. There are two or more actions that you can possibly do. 2. There is a moral reason(s) for doing such actions. 3. You cannot do all the possible actions presented to you. You only need to choose one. Three Levels of Moral Dilemma17 1. Personal moral dilemma (individual) happens individually, like being confronted with a situation wherein you either need to choose between a friend who is at fault or a stranger who is a victim of your friend, while you know the truth about the matter. A person whose choice will adversely affect very important people in your life (personal). 16 Ibid, p.9 17 Ibid, p. 9-10 29 | P a g e  2. Organization moral dilemma (organizational) is a dilemma happened when you are in organizations, especially in the field of business. Example of it, like in hospitals, when the machine tells you a negative result of a certain medical test even if you know that the test is positive because you and your companion made the test again without the machine, will you say positive even if the machine tells negative or you will say negative disregarding the additional danger that will happen to the patient, just to save the business of the hospital. A business owner whose choice will adversely affect either the company or the employees (organizational). 3. Structural moral dilemma (structural) is a dilemma where it involves the whole society, like the good and bad effect of the train law, wherein the middle class suffer more on the higher prices while the lower class is less affected since their compensation was raised more. A high-ranking government official who needs to choose between implementing or not implementing a policy not because it will affect the poor communities, but not implementing it will also impact the environment (structural). Moral Judgment and Moral Decision Making Moral Judgment Judgments involve our intuitions and/or our capacity to reach decisions through reasoning. Moral judgments refer to judgments that have moral content; they are used to evaluate situations, courses of action, persons, behavior, etc. However, the basis for the moral differs from every person and every 30 | P a g e moral philosopher. Some based their judgements on culture, on emotion, on personal preference, on virtue, on the good result of the action, the action that is an end itself. Example of it is when a certain situation is in need to be judged as to whether what someone has done is right or wrong, good or bad. Moral Decision A moral decision is a choice made based on a person's ethics, manners, character and what they believe is proper behavior. Like when you are confronted with a moral dilemma, you should make a moral decision such that a solution will arrive in the situation. Freedom According of many philosophers, humans are the only capable entities who can be ethical. This is so because unlike animals, human can freely decide on a certain action they would like to perform. Shortly saying, only humans have a reason to understand a situation and a freedom to choose whatever decision humans thought the right to do. Furthermore, “rational behavior is decision-making process where the person acts in ways that best achieve his or her needs in accordance with his or her set of preferences, priorities and principles. Rational behavior is tied to moral standards. In addition, the human person in his or her decision- making process is free to decide what to do and free to act on his or her decisions. Thus, only human beings can be ethical because only humans have the capacity for free moral judgment.18 18 Ibid, p. 12 31 | P a g e Foundation of Morality19 C. S. Lewis, a novelist, poet, academic, medievalist, literary critic, essayist, lay theologian, broadcaster, lecturer and Christian apologist used an interesting metaphor to explain morality. He likened morality to a fleet of ships. According to Lewis, though each ship must sail well on its own, each must also coordinate with the other ships at all times to stay in formation and avoid collisions. Finally, the fleet must have a destination or purpose for the journey because if the ship was just aimlessly sailing then it has failed its ultimate purpose – that of getting from one point to the next. This is a very helpful way to think about morality in relation to self, to others, and your ultimate end. However, there is one crucial difference between a ship and a person (aside, of course, from the obvious) – a ship is under the command of a ship captain. However, a person is someone who is free to decide his or her course. Why is freedom crucial in your ability to make moral decisions? TriBEEia “The personal aspect of morality is about developing virtue so that thinking morally, performing moral acts, and choosing to do what is good become a habit. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2016) explained that virtue is your thought or behavior guided by, and displays, high moral standards. Virtues are habits developed through learning and practice. Once you have it, your virtues become your characteristic. Moreover, a virtuous person characteristically acts in ways consistent with his or her moral principles. Thus, a 19 Ibid, p. 12 32 | P a g e virtuous person goes beyond moral behavior. A virtuous person not only does what is right but his or her behavior also becomes a standard for everyone to follow. Because a person is free, he is able to decide and cultivate his or her moral values, through habit and practice. Thus, to become a virtuous person, habit and practice, which is the result the correct practice of the use of freedom, should be present in the practice of virtue. Once a person becomes virtuous then as it was mentioned above, the ability to make moral decision can now be founded on virtue, which goes beyond moral behavior.”20 Philosophical Insights of Freedom  Freedom is a gift. It is the ability to act significant choices because freedom is a gift given to us by God, according to Gabriel Marcel.  Freedom is Complementary to Reason. In Aristotle’s view, the human person as a moral agent must exercise practical rationality in order to determine how to pursue his/her ultimate end (telos). Self-direction, rather than spontaneity is the crucial characteristics of the free person. Aristotle considered freedom and reason as necessary faculties for consciously making sense of things.  Freedom is absolute. According to Sartre, the human person is “absolutely free.” The absolute freedom rests on the idea that even if there may be restrictions in the freedom of a human person, like a person in jail, but he/she is still free to think, change, become a better person.  Freedom demands Responsibility. Sartre says, that because you are free, you need to make a choice, from the 20 Ibid, p. 12 33 | P a g e  choice/decision, there arise the responsibility. Thus responsibility follows freedom. Lao Tzu also believes that as a person act, he or she can and should choose to act that which result in harmony. The action itself should be guided by responsibility. Responsibility as a moral quality serves as a voluntary check and balance of one’s freedom. Without proper balance limitless freedom is as dangerous as an extremely controlling social group. Great social injustices have resulted from such radical mindsets. Moral Theories and Moral Reasoning Moral Theories A moral theory consists of a set of moral principles. These principles specify the conditions under which an action is morally right or wrong, or what makes a person or something good or bad. They purport to guide our moral reasoning. Moral Reasoning The term “moral reasoning” or “ethical reasoning” refer to the reasoning process by which human behaviors, institutions, or policies are judged in accordance with or in violation of moral standards. Moral reasoning always involves two essential components: (1) an understanding of what moral standards require or prohibit and (2) evidence or information that shows that a particular policy, institution or behavior has the kinds of features that these moral standards require or prohibit Moral Dimension of Human Existence “The experience of morality,” according to Michael Moga, “is part of every person’s life.” It is found in the various 34 | P a g e obligations that arise, the experience of actions which should be either performed or avoided.” Thus, terms such as “good,” “bad,” “right,” or “wrong” “appropriate” “ought,” “ought” “obligation” ‘duty’ and the like, are commonly found in various forms in human conversations. But it can be asked whether the whole of human experience fall under the ambit of morality? Are all areas of human life covered by ethical evaluation and judgement? Are all human conduct and enterprise subject to moral praise or condemnation? Or are there some aspects in human experience not within the domain of ethics and morality? “Are we to think of morality as something which is (only) found in one limited area of human life without any relevance to the other areas (such as in the social, aesthetic, religious, business, scientific, etc). Or are we to conceive of morality as an integral part of every human experience. 35 | P a g e  Chapter 1 The Moral Agent When we talk about the moral agent, we go back to the question about “who is the one acting morally? Or who is the agent of morality?” In the discussion of the preceding pages, we identify the human being as the only capable of being ethical; on this part also we examine humans as the moral agent. Here, we don’t focus anymore about who is a human being? But instead we will focus on the role of culture in the shaping of the moral behavior of the moral agent, the factors involving cultural relativism, the Filipino culture, traits and values, the development of moral character and the stages of moral development. In addition to that, it was added also on this chapter the three sources of authority which became the bases for the moral standard. Moreover, on this part also, a discussion on the elements of human acts and the determinants of morality. Lesson 1: The Three Sources of Authority21 Law “It is supposed that law is one’s guide to ethical behavior. In the Philippines, Filipinos are constrained to obey the laws of the land as stated in the country’s criminal and civil coded. Making this even mora particular, in Cebu, residents are constrained to follow any provincial laws or city ordinances. One can easily imagine this becoming even more localized to the barangay level or village level, where local municipal layers 21 All the discussion on this topic is taken directly from Bulaong Jr., O. et.al. (2018) Ethics: Foundations of Moral Valuation, 1st edition. Rex Bookstore, Inc.,: Sampaloc, Manila 36 | P a g e of obligation are there for residents to follow. The term positive law refers to the different rules and regulations that are posited or put forward by an authority figure that requires compliance.” “At first glance, this seems to make a lot of sense. We recognize that there are many acts that we immediately consider unethical (e.g. murder or theft), which we also know are forbidden by law. Furthermore, the law is enforced by way of a system of sanctions administered through persons and institutions, which all help in compelling us to obey. Taking the law to be the basis of ethics has the benefit of providing us with an objective standard that is obligatory and applicable to all. So, we could not be surprised if we were to hear someone say, “Ethics? It is simple. Just follow whatever the law says.”” “However, there are some problems with this. Of course, we do maintain that, generally speaking, one should obey the laws. However, the idea that we are examining here is a more controversial one: the more radical claim that one can look to the law itself in order to determine what is right or wrong. But the question is: can one simply identify ethics with the law?” “One point to be raised is the prohibitive nature of law. The law does not tell us what we should do; it works by constraining us from performing acts that we should not do. To put it slightly differently, the law cannot tell us what to pursue, only what to avoid. Would we be satisfied thinking about ethics solely from the negative perspective of that which we may not do, disregarding the important aspect of a good which we could and maybe even should do, even if it were not required of us by the law?” “In line with this, we might find that there are certain ways of acting which are not forbidden by the law, but are ethically questionable to us. For instance, a company that pads 37 | P a g e its profits by refusing to give its employees benefits may do so within the parameters of the law. The company can do so by refusing to hire people on a permanent basis, but offering them six months contracts. Constrained to work under this contractual system, the employees are thus deprived not only of benefits, but also of job security. Here, no law is violated, yet one can wonder whether there is something ethically questionable to this business practice. The fact that one can make such a negative valued judgment of the practice where there is no violation of the law is already a hint that one can look to something beyond the law when making our ethical valuations.” “To make this point concrete, recall the story of a toddler who had been run over by a couple of vehicles. While there were many passers-by who witnessed what happened, for quite a long while, no one did anything to help. The child later died in the hospital. The law does not oblige people to help others in need, so none of these passers-by were guilty of breaking the law. However, many people reacting to this sad news report share a sense that those passers-by were somewhat ethically culpable in their negligence. In view of all this, perhaps one should think of ethics in a way that does not simply identify it with obedience to the law. Later, we shall see how the concept of the law is creatively utilized in the Deontology of Immanuel Kant in a more ethically significant way.”22 22 Bulaong Jr., O. et.al. (2018) Ethics: Foundations of Moral Valuation, 1st edition. Rex Bookstore, Inc.,: Sampaloc, Manila 38 | P a g e  Religion “Love the Lord your God, therefore, and always heed his charge, his statute, decrees and commandments.” - New American Bible) “This is the first line of Chapter 11 of the book of Deuteronomy. It expresses a claim that many people of a religious sensibility find appealing and immediately valid: the idea that one is obliged to obey his/her God in all things. As a foundation for ethical values, this is referred to as the divine command theory. The divinity called God, Allah, or Supreme Being commands and one is obliged to obey his/her Creator. There are persons and texts that one believes are linked to the Divine. By listening to these figures and reading these writings, an individual discovers how the Divine wants his/her to act. Further, someone maintaining a more radical form of this theory might go beyond these instruments of divine revelation and claim that God “spoke” to her directly to instruct what to do.” “At first glance, this seems to make a lot of sense. Many of us had been brought up with one form of religious upbringing or another, so it is very possible that there is a strong inclination in us to refer to our religious background to back up our moral valuations. We are presented with a more-or-less clear code of prohibitions and many of these prohibitions given by religion – “Thou shall not kill,” “Thou shall not steal,” and “Thou shall not commit adultery” – seem to intuitively coincide with our sense of what ethics should rightly demand. In addition, there is an advance here over the law because religion is not simply prohibitive, but it also provides ideals to pursue. For instance, one may be called to forgive those who sinned against him or be charitable to those who have less. Further, 39 | P a g e taking religion as basis of ethics has the advantage of providing us with not only a set of commands but also a Supreme Authority that can inspire and compel our obedience in a way that nothing else can. The Divine can command absolute obedience on one’s part as the implications of her actions involve her ultimate destiny. Thus, we would not be surprised if we were to hear someone say, “Ethics? It is simple. Just follow whatever your religion says.” “However, there are some problems with this. (1) On the practical level, because there are multiple religions and each religion has each own way of commanding its faithful, which leads to differing ethical standards, there appears conflicts on the case of different ethical standards of every religion. Take for example, Hinduism says that cow is holy and should not be eaten, however, other religions like Christianity or Islam don’t give any importance of the holiness of the cow so that they look at a cow as a kind of food or aid in farming. What standard then would we follow? (2) On the conceptual level, we will see a problem about the connection between ethics and the Divine. The classical example of it is the Euthyphro of the dialogues of Plato. Here, Socrates asks the question, what makes killing wrong? Is it because God commanded or because it is in itself wrong? The central problem here lies on the idea that if killing is wrong only because God commanded it, then the wrongness of the act is dependent on what God commands. So as long as God commanded it, He has the authority to say that something is wrong, which leads to the idea that there is no such thing as inherently wrong. Then, it seems that what the Crusaders did in the Crusade was wrong even if it was just an act of protecting the Promised Land which resort to killing the enemies. On the other hand, if we were to accept that killing is in itself wrong, then we acknowledge that perhaps there are 40 | P a g e standards of right or wrong that we can refer to independently of God. Then, God is not needed anymore to judge on the rightness or wrongness of an act.”23 Culture24 “Our exposure to different societies and their culture makes us aware that there are ways of thinking and valuing that are different from our own, that there is in fact a wide diversity of how different people believe it is proper to act. There are aesthetic differences (Japanese art vs. Indian art), religious differences (Buddhism vs. Christianity), and etiquette differences (conflicting behaviors regarding dining practices). In these bases, it may become easy to conclude that this is the case in ethics as well. There are also various examples that seem to bear these out: nudity can be more taboo in one culture than in another. Another example would be how relations between men and women can show a wide variety across different cultures, ranging from greater liberality and equality on one hand, to greater inequality and a relation of dominance versus submission on the other. From the reality of diversity, it is possible for someone to jump to the further claim that the sheer variety at work in the different ways of valuation means there is no single universal standard for such valuations, and that this hold true as well in the realm of ethics. Therefore, what is ethically acceptable or unacceptable is relative to, or that is to say, dependent on one’s culture. This position is referred to as cultural relativism. “There is something appealing to this way of thinking because cultural relativism seems to conform to what we 23 Bulaong Jr., O. et.al. (2018) Ethics: Foundations of Moral Valuation, 1st edition. Rex Bookstore, Inc.,: Sampaloc, Manila, p. 11 24 st Bulaong Jr., O. et.al. (2018) Ethics: Foundations of Moral Valuation, 1 edition. Rex Bookstore, Inc.,: Sampaloc, Manila, p. 12 41 | P a g e experience, which the reality of the differences in how cultures make their ethical valuations. Second, by taking one’s culture as the standard, we are provided a basis for our valuations. Third, this teaches us to be tolerant of others from different cultures, as we realize that we are in no position to judge whether the ethical thought or practice of another culture is acceptable or unacceptable. In turn, our own culture’s moral code is neither superior to nor inferior to any other, but they would provide us the standards that are appropriate and applicable to us. So, we would not be surprised if we were to hear some says, “Ethics? It is simple. Just follow whatever your culture says.”25 Lesson 2: Elements of Human Acts and Determinants of Morality For an act to be a human act, it should constitute three basic elements. However, human acts (Actus Humani) refer to “actions that proceed from insight into the nature and purpose of one’s doing and from consent of free will.” 26 This further means that human acts are actions which are results of conscious knowledge, free will and consent or voluntariness. Three Basic Elements of Human Acts27 1. Human Act is Deliberate. An action is deliberate when a person doing the act has conscious knowledge upon performing the act; who knows about the consequences of the act and about what is right or wrong in reference to the act. So people like lunatics, crazy, senile, did not reach the age of freedom, and those influenced by drugs or 25 Bulaong Jr., O. et.al. (2018) Ethics: Foundations of Moral Valuation, 1st edition. Rex Bookstore, Inc.,: Sampaloc, Manila, p. 12 26 Perschke, Karl. 1987. Christian Ethics: Moral Theology in the Light of Vatican II. Vol.1.Manila: Divine Word Publication 27 Fernandez,A. et.al. (2018). Ethics: Deciding what is Right and Wrong. SMKC Printshoppe: Davao City 42 | P a g e  alcohol (though they are somewhat conscious in some instances) are incapable of acting knowingly and with sufficient knowledge. 2. Human act is performed in freedom. An action which is performed without hindrance and duress and has the element of free will is a human act. The person should have all the power and volition when performing this act and should not be under control and free from any force to qualify it a human act. 3. Human act is done voluntarily. “It must be performed by an agent who decides willfully to perform the act. The act, to be truly a voluntary one, must come from the core of a person’s being. This willfulness is the resolve to do an act here and now, or in some other time in the future.”28 Determinants of Morality “By determinants of morality, we mean the various factors or elements that would allow us to identify concretely – whether a certain and particular act done in a given situation – is good or bad, right or wrong, moral or immoral – in reference to the objective norm of morality. More specifically, determinants of morality refer to the sources that define the goodness/rightness or badness/wrongness of actions – done with knowledge, freedom and consent.”29 1. The Act Itself or the Object of the Act30 The act is simply “WHAT the person does.”31 It is “the natural termination or completion of an act…(which) determines whether an act is intrinsically or extrinsically 28 Fernandez,A. et.al. (2018). Ethics: Deciding what is Right and Wrong. SMKC Printshoppe: Davao City 29 Ibid, p. 32 30 Ibid, p.32 31 Ibid, p.32 43 | P a g e  good or evil.” 32 This is the substance of the moral act and here regarded as the basic factor of morality.33 “More concretely, the object of the act is “that act effect which an action primarily and directly causes. It is always and necessary the result of the act, independent of any circumstances or of the intention of the agent.” “From the standpoint of its object, morality can be objective and intrinsic. This means that objectively, there are actions by themselves (taken as they are, as “mere acts”), as good and bad, right and wrong, moral and immoral. By their very nature – murder, rape, torture, cheating, blasphemy, adultery and the like – are really morally wrong or bad. Thus, no amount of “good” intention or favorable circumstance can alter their evilness. Their badness is something embedded in their very nature.”34 2. The Motive or the Intention35 “The motive is the purpose or intention that for the sake of which something is done. It is the reason behind our acting. It answers the question “WHY the person does what he does?”36 Since intention or motive is practically present in all human acts, it then becomes an integral part of morality. “Depending on one’s motive or intention, a particular act or conduct can be modified in its moral worth. Thus, under the motive or intention, there are four principles to be considered. They are as follows: 2.1 An indifferent act can become morally good or morally evil depending upon the intention of the person doing the act. 32 Agapay, R. (2008). Ethics and the Filipino. Manila: National Book Store, Inc., p.63 33 Fernandez,A. et.al. (2018). Ethics: Deciding what is Right and Wrong. SMKC Printshoppe: Davao City, p.32 34 Ibid, p. 33 35 Ibid, p.33 36 Ibid, p.33 44 | P a g e Example: Talking or speaking has no moral worth but when we include the discussion about intention or motive, especially if the intention of the talking is to destroy other’s reputation, then talking becomes bad. 2.2 An objectively good act becomes morally evil due to a wrong or bad motive. Example: The act of helping a person in need is a noble act (objectively good) but if the act is coupled with the intention of doing it for the sake of getting public attention and popularity, the act itself becomes wrong or “less good” 2.3 An intrinsically (objectively) morally good act can receive added goodness, if done with an equally noble intention or motive. Example: The act of working well in a company is already a good act but when coupled with the intention of doing it because you would like to contribute to the well-being of the company as well as help your parents and family by supporting them through the compensation and fruit of one’s work, then the morally good act receive added goodness because of the intention. 2.4 An intrinsically evil act can never become morally good even if it is done with a good motive or intention. Example: To cheat in the exam in order to pass the subject and graduate in time is a wrong act even if the intention is good. And no matter how good the intention is as long as the act itself is wrong, the action is morally wrong. The end does not justify the means. 3. The Circumstances “The moral goodness or badness of an act is determined not only by the object or act itself, plus the motive or intention of the moral agent but also on the circumstances or situation surrounding the performance of the action.” 45 | P a g e  “Circumstances refer to the various conditions outside of the act. They are not, strictly speaking, part and parcel of the act itself. Circumstances are conditions that influence, to a lesser or greater degree, the moral quality of the human act. They either “affect the act by increasing or lessening its voluntariness or freedom, and thus, affecting the morality of the act.” “The kinds of circumstances that the study of Ethics deals with are those which change and modify the specific moral character of the human act.”37 Four Types of Circumstances that Affect the Morality of the Act 1. Mitigating or extenuating circumstances diminish the degree of moral good or evil in an act. To kill an innocent person is murder. However, suppose a person commits murder for the first time or without premeditation and later admits his/her guilt, then these circumstances lessen the severity of the act and its punishment. 2. Aggravating circumstances increase the degree of moral good or evil in act without adding a new and distinct species of moral good or evil. The same act of murder can be made worse if it is carried out at night and with the use of superior arms by a known recidivist. 3. Justifying circumstances show adequate reason for some acts done. A person charged with murder can vindicate himself/herself if he/she can prove that he/she killed a superior aggressor and that he/she did so in defense of his/her own life. 37 Fernandez,A. et.al. (2018). Ethics: Deciding what is Right and Wrong. SMKC Printshoppe: Davao City, p.34- 35. All texts are taken from this book. 46 | P a g e  4. Specifying circumstances give a new and distinct species of moral good or evil act. The moral quality of the act of murder changes if the murderer is wife of the victim, or if the murderer and the victim are one and the same. Evidently, therefore, not only the nature of the act itself, but also the circumstances which served as a reason for it, renders it worthy of approval or condemnation.38 Lesson 3: How culture shapes our moral behavior? What is Culture? Culture, as defined by Edward Taylor in the book of Pasigui et.al. is “that complex whole which includes knowledge, beliefs, arts, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society” 39 It contains nearly all aspects of shared human experiences. It is then a common and well-accepted belief that culture plays a very influential and essential role in the development and formation of one’s moral character. At the same time, since people live in the society, wherein they need to fill the part of the society so that they can live together. By this, the human beings learned to live together, to seek survival as well as acceptance from other people. People then learned to modify their behaviors to fit in the society they live in. In the discussion about the three sources of authority, culture was being mentioned as a basis of moral standard since for many philosophers, morality can be separated with culture for “any meaningful and relevant discussion of ethics must include culture as a major theme. And any discussion of morality that is not rooted with the living concreteness of human cultural life is simply unrealistic and even absurd. For some, morality is 38 This four types of Circumstances that Affect the Morality of the Acts is directly taken from Fernandez,A. et.al. (2018). Ethics: Deciding what is Right and Wrong. SMKC Printshoppe: Davao City, p.35 39 Pasigui, R. et.al. (2011). Sociology: Theory and Practice. Mutya Publishing, Inc.: Malabon City., p. 53 47 | P a g e but a result of cultural factors. For them, Ethics or morality is simply defined by one’s culture. That it is nothing but a mere social construct. No more, no less.”40 Modifiers of Human Acts41 Factors and conditions that affect to a considerable extent man’s inner disposition towards certain actions are known as “modifiers of human acts.” As the term modifiers implies, they influence specifically the mental and/or emotional state of a person concerned to the point that the voluntariness involved in an act is either increased or diminished. This is significant precisely because the moral accountability of the doer of the action is also increased or decreased, as the case may be. These modifiers, accordingly, “affect human acts in the essential qualities of knowledge, freedom, voluntariness, and so make them less perfectly human.” 1. Ignorance – is the absence of necessary knowledge which a person on a given situation, who is performing a certain act, ought to have. Ignorance therefore is a negative thing for it is a negation of knowledge. 2. Passion or Concupiscence –is here understood as a strong or powerful feeling or emotion. It refers more specifically to those bodily appetites or tendencies as experienced and expressed in such feelings as fear, love, hatred, despair, horror, sadness, anger, grief and the like. Passion or concupiscence is also known by other names such as sentiments, affections, desires, etc. It is also either an 40 Fernandez,A. et.al. (2018). Ethics: Deciding what is Right and Wrong. SMKC Printshoppe: Davao City, p.50 41 Ibid, page 38-43. 48 | P a g e  inclination towards desirable objects, or, a tendency away from undesirable or harmful things. It includes both positive and negative emotions. 3. Fear – is defined as “the disturbance of the mind of a person who is confronted by an impending danger or harm to himself or loved ones.” Fear may be considered a passion which arises as an impulsive movement of avoidance of a threatening evil, ordinarily accompanied by bodily disturbances”. Here it is treated as a “special kind” of passion, and hence also treated as another distinct modifier of human act since it is a kind of a test of one’s mental character. 4. Violence – refers to “any physical force exerted on a person by another free agent for the purpose of compelling the said person to act against his will.” Any act where great and brutal force is inflicted to a person constitutes violence. This includes acts such as torture, mutilation and the like. 5. Habit – is a “constant and easy way of doing things acquired by the repetition of the same act.” Also, habit is the readiness, born of frequently repeated acts, for acting in a certain manner.” Lesson 4: Cognitive and Ethical Relativism Cognitive Relativism “Cognitive relativism asserts the relativity of truth.”42 This contention is due to the close connections between the concept of truth and concepts such as knowledge, rationality and justification. 42 Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy under Cognitive Relativism 49 | P a g e Immanuel Kant He believes that one cannot know the thing in themselves but what can be known to the human mind is the thing that appears to the senses. This lead Immanuel Kant to ask the question, Is what we can know determined by a world that is independent of us or is it, in some sense, ‘up to us’? An example of this is how one knows that the knowledge of the table from the conception of the object table is really the thing table and not just the appearance of the thing. Friedrich Nietzsche This philosopher is famous in introducing the so-called perspectivism. In this theory, Nietzsche believes that there are no such as things in themselves but only on the perspective that we decide to see on the things. It is not really about the things that we perceive but primarily about the way we see things. This led Nietzsche to ask this question, Do we really see things as what they are or they are just what they are because we see them as what they are – perspectivism? Richard Rorty and Pragmatism Language is used to represent the world and that truth registers a correspondence between what we say and how the world is. Knowledge is not an accurate representation of ‘reality.’ Rather it is a belief that is justified to others and thus relative to the ‘grid’ or framework that happens to prevail at any given time and place to determine what counts as relevant evidence. 50 | P a g e Ethical Relativism and Cultural Relativism “Ethical Relativism refers to a view or doctrine that ethical values and beliefs (as to what is right/good and wrong/bad) are relative to the time, place, persons, situations and societies that hold them. In short, Ethical Relativism is a theory that holds that there are no universally valid moral principles; that all moral values are valid relative to culture or individual choice. For an ethical relativist, “whether an action is right or wrong depends on the moral norms of society or the moral commitments of the individual, and no absolute standard exists by which differing rules or commitments can be judged” 43 “The first to use the term “cultural relativism” was philosopher and social theorist Alain Locke in 1924. Cultural relativism explains why one behavior or practice is completely acceptable by a particular group of people, while it is taboo in another. It refers to the idea that values, knowledge and behavior of people must be understood within its own cultural context, and not by the standards of other cultures. Hence, all moral and ethical standards (or the judgment of what is right or wrong) is valid and there is not “one” standard that is “better” among all others.”44 Five Claims of Cultural Relativists as to why Right or Wrong is only a matter of Cultural Standards45 1. Different societies have different moral codes. 43 Ibid, p. 51 All texts are taken from the same source. 44 Gallinero W.(2018). Ethics. Mutya Publishing House, Inc.: Malabon City, p. 28. All texts are taken from the same source. 45 Ibid, p. 28-29. All texts are taken from the same source. 51 | P a g e  2. The moral code of a society determines what is right or wrong. There is no objective standard considered better than others. 3. There are no universal moral truths. 4. The moral code of a particular society has no special status. It is but one among many. 5. It is arrogant for one culture to judge another culture. There should be tolerance among culture. The Advantages and Dangers of Cultural Relativism46 Two Positive Lessons of Cultural Relativism 1. It warns us from assuming that our preferences are the absolute rational standard. 2. It teaches us to keep an open mind and to be more amenable in discovering the truth. Dangers of Cultural Relativism 1. We cannot call out societal practices that promote harm. If cultural relativism is true, then we should not condemn what Hitler and the Nazis did against the Jews, Apartheid in South Africa, or any form of maltreatment, damage, injury, or destruction that one community inflicts upon anyone or anything. 2. We cannot justifiably criticize our own culture’s harmful practices. This implies that to decide whether your action is right or wrong all you need to do is check whether your action is in accordance with the standards of YOUR society. If your actions are in line with your culture, then you have done nothing wrong – even though your actions were harmful. After all, if it is true that you cannot criticize other cultures, then all the more can you not 46 Ibid, p. 29. All texts are taken from the same source 52 | P a g e  criticize your own culture since people in your group accept it as a way of life. 3. The idea of social progress becomes doubtful. Progress means replacing something old with something better. However, if cultural relativism is to be followed, by what standards do we say that a society has become better? The idea of social reform is now eradicated because we are prohibited from judging one society as better over others. Arguments for Ethical Relativism 1. The Cultural Differences Argument One of the most often cited reasons to support Ethical Relativism is the actual existence of moral diversity among cultures. Throughout history many societies have held beliefs and practices about morality that are strikingly different from our own. The indisputable reality of cultural diversity has been tremendously influential; it has persuaded a lot of people to adopt a skeptical stance as to the whole idea of an objective and universal moral truth. 2. The Argument from Respect As we have just noted above, Ethical Relativism rooted in cultural multiplicity seemed to be very appealing to a good number of people, especially among the youth of today. “Part of its powerful drawing power is due to the fact that such view has been thought to promote tolerance.” Accordingly, if moral codes differ from culture and there is no objective or culturally dependent basis by which to judge 53 | P a g e the moral code of any culture, then the moral code of one’s particular culture has no special status compared with the rest. This would mean that each of the culture has its own unique and importance to every society. Thus, it is necessary that everyone should respect each other’s culture. 3. Psychological Argument This argument undermines confidence in the objectivity of ethics by making us aware of the non-rational ways in which moral ideas and beliefs are formed and developed in the individual. Among psychologists, there is considerable agreement about how this happens; the picture remains remarkably constant, even when we consider radically different psychological theories. All these suggest a certain conclusion: Our values are simply the result of our having been conditioned to behave in a certain way. We may feel that certain actions are good and others are bad or evil, but that is merely because we all had been trained and conditioned to have those feelings, beginning when we were still little children usually through parental rearing. 4. Conformity Argument “Some people accept Ethical Relativism because they somehow think that people should conform with and embrace the ethical code of their respective societies or culture. In fact some even went as far as believing that it is their duty to do so. As social beings by nature, it is but natural for people to easily 54 | P a g e affiliate and conform to the accepted ethical standards of the particular group that they belong. Through cultural relativism, it is thought that people would come to be more accepting of their own societal norms. Their belief gives a good basis for a common morality with a culture – in fact, a kind of a democratic basis where “diverse ideas and principles are pooled in, thus insuring that the norms/rules that a certain society would eventually accept have a wide and solid support. This then provides the central validity or justification of the morality of the group, whatever it may be. 5. The Provability Argument Finally, another reason to believe that what Ethical Relativism holds is indeed true is the undeniable fact of moral dispute occurring between and among groups as well as individuals. The usual experience of people having a great difficulty in knowing what is morally “right thing”to do in a particular situation has led to a general attitude of skepticism on the possibility of determining, much worse establishing a universal and definite moral standard. The main point of contention of this line of argument is this since we cannot fully prove the universal truth in ethics, then we cannot also distinguish which moral opinions are true and which are false. 55 | P a g e Critical Evaluation of Ethical Relativism On Cultural Diversity Because of cultural diversity, many people think morality is just as obvious as it is relative to culture. If people differ in the clothes they wear, the kind of food they eat and the language they speak, why cannot they also differ in their moral beliefs? If the former is not universal, why should morality be universal? Another thing is that this is also a form of contradiction. If morality is relative to one’s culture, is this very statement subject also to this same relativity? “If everything is relative, then the very truth of relativism would also be relative” On the Argument from Respect Some people have come to accept Ethical Relativism because they believe that people should not judge other people from other cultures or societies on the basis of their own moral standards. Besides, they think that this is the attitude of mature and enlightened minds, the kind that can render respect and tolerance in the face of something unfamiliar and even contradictory Another argument against the issue on toleration is that acceptance of it involves one in some sort of a contradiction. While tolerance is definitively a virtue, it cannot be practiced consistently. Why? If morality simply is relative to each culture, then what if the culture in question does not have toleration as part of its moral code? This would naturally mean that the 56 | P a g e members of that culture have no moral obligation to practice toleration. On the Psychological Argument As what we have discussed, the Psychological Argument is undoubtedly very impressive. Hence, if it is proven to be logically sound, it will definitely add to the file of arguments stacked in favor of Ethical Relativism. According to Rachels, he said, “even granting that the truth of the premise, that we do acquire our moral beliefs by a process like the one psychologists described, we would have different moral beliefs, thus, there’s no such thing as objective moral truth, does not follow, hence unsound and invalid. On the Argument from Conformity I think that of all the arguments forwarded in defense of Ethical Relativism, the Argument from Conformity is seemingly the easiest to destroy and annihilate. According to one form of Ethical Relativism, whatever a society believes to be right is right for that particular society. What is considered as “good” is what the majority as the major constitution of a society, approves or acknowledges as good. Likewise, what the majority says as “bad”is bad. Thus, morality is simply dependent of what the majority wants or decides. What is good and bad is reducible to a kind of social contract or a matter of group consensus. 57 | P a g e On the Provability Argument Its plausibility mainly hangs on how strict and rigid we should take the whole question of “proof” in matters pertaining to morality. If we take proof as we ordinarily construe it to be in day-to-day, “normal” conversation, then we would venture to say that moral issues can be “proved.” But if we take to mean “proof” in the standard scientific sense, then, we would say otherwise. Another point here is that it does not mean that “no proof” has been found to answer the objective moral truth, then there is no real proof about it. It is just that the proof has not yet been provided since the search for a proof of universal truth is not limited to a particular duration of time. Why there are Universal Values47 The dangers that cultural relativism present led thinkers such as ethics expert Dr. James Rachels to reject cultural relativism because it implausible. The empirical basis of cultural relativism is that cultures are dramatically different in its views of what is right or wrong. However, when it comes to important moral issues, there are three values that are universal (Rachel, 2004). The three universal values shared by all cultures are: 1. Caring for the young 2. Murder is wrong 3. Tell the truth 47 Ibid, p.31. All texts are taken from the same source. 58 | P a g e Lesson 5: The Filipino culture, traits, and values Filipino (Cultural) Values48 Values are universal, shared by all people. What we call “Filipino” values are those given emphasis in the culture and tradition of the Filipinos. They shape character, or ugaling Pilipino. The study of cultural values belongs also to Ethics. They are cultural habits that define the Filipino attitude towards life in general and towards specific actions in particular. They may rightly be regarded as modifiers of human acts, influencing their motivations. They are besides the raw materials of the social and spiritual development of a Filipino as a person in a community of persons. They lend support of building a nation. Values do not belong exclusively to Filipinos. But certain universal values find different meaning and application within the experiential and historical circumstances of the Filipino. What we call Filipino values are those who derive from our culture or way of life, from “our distinctive way of becoming human in this particular place and time. The values of the Filipinos spring from their peculiar way of viewing life, its origin, its meaning, and its purpose. For example, the value of pananalig sa Maykapal comes from the belief that God is the Supreme Creator. The values of pag-ibig, pakikipag-kapwa, pagpapahalaga sa pamilya, hiya, utang na loob – take roots on their awareness of social relatedness. And from the awareness of his worth as a person, dignified and responsible – come dangal, amor propio, delicadeza, and palabra de honor. 48 Agapay, R. (1991). Ethics and the Filipino : A Manual on Morals for Students and Educators. National Bookstore, Inc.: Mandaluyong City. All texts are taken from the same source indicated. 59 | P a g e  Qualities of the Filipino Moral Identity49 The Filipino culture is a mix of both Easter and Western cultures. The beliefs and traditions of pre-colonial Philippines was mainly indigenous Malay heritage. Then the Spanish colonized the islands and the Hispanic culture influenced the natives. In turn, the Americans shaped the modern Filipino culture and this is primarily manifested by the wide use of the English language in the Philippines today. It was from these influences that formed the Filipino character. The brief occupation of the British (1762-1764) and the Japanese (1942- 1945) however had no cultural influence in the Philippines at all. Psychologist, educator, and former Chairperson of the Commission on Higher Education, Dr. Patricia B. Licuanan wrote that the strengths and weaknesses of the Filipino character are rooted in factors such as: 1. The home environment. This is where Filipino children are taught to value family and give it primary importance. 2. The social environment. The Filipino social environment is characterized by depending on one another to survive. This dependence on relationships and the struggle for survival make Filipinos group oriented. 3. Culture and language. This depicts openness to foreign elements with no basic consciousness of our cultural core. The Filipino colonial mentality such as the importance of the English language in our educational system, the wider following of Hollywood movies, foreign soap operas/TV shows, and foreign songs/singers over Filipino movies, shows, and music is a manifestation of our attachment to foreign elements. 49 Gallinero W.(2018). Ethics. Mutya Publishing House, Inc.: Malabon City, p.34-35. All texts are taken from the same source 60 | P a g e  4. History. Licuanan added that our colonial history is regarded as the culprit behind our colonial mentality. Unfortunately, most Filipino elite are of no help in setting an example of overcoming colonial mentality because they are even more westernized in their ways. Present day media on the other hand reinforce these colonial influences. 5. The Educational system. The Philippine educational system is also instrumental in molding the strengths and weaknesses of the Filipino character. Schools are highly authoritarian. Early on, children learn that well-behaved and obedient students are praised and rewarded. This teaches passivity and conformity. 6. Religion. The Filipino is also religious. Religion taught us optimism and resilience. However, it is also instilled in us a fatalistic attitude. Since religious communities are also highly authoritarian, this further reinforced our being passive and a conformist. 7. The Economic Environment. Several Filipino traits are rooted in our economic environment. The hard life drove Filipinos to work hard and take risks, such as leaving our families to work abroad. This further developed our ability to survive. 8. The Political Environment. The political environment and government structures and systems are fraught with problems. For instance, the fact that political power is mainly in the hands of the elite and the absence of a strong government presence enhanced the Filipino’s already extreme family centeredness. The economic and political environments are among the elements that developed the culture of corruption in the Philippines. 61 | P a g e  9. Mass media. The effect of colonial mentality to mass media is also great. The ads, the music, movies, fashion, etc., shown on TV, aired over the radio, printed in the newspapers/magazines or went viral online are greatly based on American pop culture. The emphasis on the superiority of an imported brand or product through mass media is, in fact, part of a Filipino’s daily life. 10. Leadership and role models. Filipinos highly respect authority; we lean on our leaders and role models. Any person with authority is looked up to. Thus, when our leaders violate the law and when there is lack of accountability for leaders who break the law, the Filipino mindset is hugely affected in a negative way. Strengths of the Filipino Character50 The Filipino traits listed here is certainly not exhaustive, but these are what we have in common the most. The strong aspects of the Filipino character are: 1. Pakikipag-kapwa Tao. This is demonstrated in the Filipino’s openness, helpfulness and generosity; in the practice of bayanihan or mutual assistance and the famous Filipino hospitality. 2. Family Orientation. Filipinos also possess a genuine love for family. This love is not just for one’s spouse and children but also to parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins (every distant ones) and even to ceremonial relatives. This love is shown through giving honor and respect to parents and elders, care for the children, generosity towards kin, and the personal sacrifices that a Filipino endures for the welfare of the family. This strong 50 Gallinero W.(2018). Ethics. Mutya Publishing House, Inc.: Malabon City, p.34-35. All texts are taken from the same source 62 | P a g e  family orientation gave Filipinos a sense of belonging and security. 3. Joy and Humor. Filipinos are also cheerful and fun loving. Our various fiestas and social gatherings demonstrate the Filipino joy and humor. We can laugh at those we love and hate, and can make jokes about out good and bad fortune. Even in the most trying times, Filipinos will always find a reason to smile or laugh. 4. Flexibility, Adaptability and Creativity. The ability to adjust to different circumstances especially in the Filipinos’ ability to overcome life’s challenges is another good Filipino character. Filipinos are tremendous in adjusting and adapting to any circumstances. We can improvise and make use of whatever is at hand to create and produce. Our flexibility, adaptability and creativity are reasons why many Filipinos thrive in various parts of the world. 5. Hard work and Industry. This trait is most noticeable in our willingness to take risks and work in other countries. 6. Faith and Religiosity. Filipinos also value faith and religiosity. This can be related to our ”bahala na” mindset. There is actually a positive side to this fatalistic trait. For Filipinos the “bahala na” attitude could serve as a “kickstarter” or a “pampalakas loob” to move him/her into action. 7. Ability to Survive. All those positive Filipino traits mentioned contribute to our ability to survive. The salawikain or proverb “matutong mamluktot habang maikli ang kumot” aptly depits our survival instinct. We can endure, make do, and get by on so little while looking to carry on even through our harsh economic and social circumstances. 63 | P a g e Weaknesses of the Filipino Character51 Aside from identifying the roots and strengths of the Filipino character, Dr. Patricia B. Licuanan also pointed out our weaknesses. This is important because this enables the Filipino to identify the areas that need improvement in order to grow and develop as a person. An informed and improved Filipino will also result in a stronger and more progressive nation. Generally, these weaknesses are: 1. Extreme personalism 2. Extreme Family-centeredness 3. Lack of Discipline 4. Passivity and Lack of Initiative 5. Colonial Mentality 6. Kanya-Kanya Syndrome 7. Lack of Self-Analysis and Self-Reflection Lesson 6: How is Moral Character developed?52 What is Moral Character? First let us take the most basic definition of the terms moral, character, and moral character. Moral is “concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior or the goodness and badness of the human character”53 Character is defined as “the mental and moral qualities distinct to an individual.” 54 But in Philosophy, the term character usually denotes to the moral dimension as a person. Moral character refers to the “existence (or lack of) virtues such as integrity, courage, fortitude, honest and loyalty.”55 51 Gallinero W.(2018). Ethics. M utya Publishing House, Inc.: Malabon City, p.34-35. All texts are taken from the same source 52 Ibid, All texts are taken from the same source 53 Merriam-Webster 2017 54 Ibid 55 Ibid 64 | P a g e