GED 107 Ethics Module 8 PDF

Ethics- BatStateU MODULE 8 HOW IS MORAL CHARACTER DEVELOPED? Introduction This module discusses how our moral character is developed. This was further explained using three approaches such as virtuous, dispositions, and circular re...

Ethics- BatStateU MODULE 8 HOW IS MORAL CHARACTER DEVELOPED? Introduction This module discusses how our moral character is developed. This was further explained using three approaches such as virtuous, dispositions, and circular relations of acts and character. This module teaches students to be virtuous, to have relatively stable, fixed and reliable dispositions of action, and to practice moderation. Lastly, it teaches students to know one’s intention and to know the effect of action on their character and to be morally responsible of their deeds. Learning Objectives At the end of the topic, students are expected to: e) Compare and contrast the three approaches of development of moral character such as virtues, dispositions and, circular relations of acts and character. f) Identify instances in their life where they applied those approaches. g) Analyze which approaches is commonly used by Filipinos and explain why. Learning Content Moral Character and its Development Moral character refers to the existence or lack of virtues such as integrity, courage, fortitude, honesty, and loyalty. To say that a certain person has a good moral character means that he/she is a good person and a good citizen with a sound moral compass (De Guzman et al., 2017). It can be conceptualized as an individual’s disposition to think, feel, and behave in an ethical versus unethical manner, or as the subset of individual differences relevant to morality (Cohen & Carnegie, 2014). Development of moral character can be explained by the following approaches: virtues, disposition, and circular relations of acts and character, and theoretical perspectives (De Guzman et al., 2017 and philonotes.com). Moral Character and Virtues Etymologically, the term “character” comes from the ancient Greek term charaktêr, which initially referred to the mark impressed upon a coin. The term charaktêr later came to refer more Ethics- BatStateU generally to any distinctive feature by which one thing is distinguished from others. Along this general line, in contemporary usage character often refers to a set of qualities or characteristics that can be used to differentiate between persons. It is used this way, for example, commonly in literature. In philosophy, however, the term character is typically used to refer to the particularly moral dimension of a person. For example, Aristotle most often used the term ēthē for character, which is etymologically linked to “ethics” and “morality” (via the Latin equivalent mores) (Timpe, 2002). One way to explain character development is through the virtue ethics approach. Virtue ethics represents the concept that individual’s actions are based upon inner moral virtue where Aristotle was the leading figure of it (philonotes.com). Virtue is a central concept in his Nicomachean Ethics wherein there are two distinct of human excellences, (1) excellences of thoughts and (2) excellences of character (De Guzman et al., 2017). Now, in virtue ethics, one does not ask the question, “what morally ought we to do?”; rather, virtue ethics posits that the basic function of morality is the moral character of persons (Beauchamp, 2001). In relation to this, Beauchamp suggests that virtue should not be thought of as a moral requirement, because this confuses with a principle or rule. Rather, virtue is a character trait that is socially valued (philonotes.com). Aristotle considered goodness of character as a product of the practice of virtuous behavior. This means that for Aristotle, virtuous acts are not the end results of a good character. In fact, according to Aristotle, virtues are tendencies to act, to feel, and judge, tendencies which are developed from natural capacity through proper training and exercise (Yarza, 1994). He believed, therefore, that practice creates a habit of acting in a virtuous way. Again, it is for this reason that virtue is something that can be learned and improved (Yarza, 1994). It is important to note that for Aristotle, virtue depends on “clear judgment, self-control, symmetry of desire, and artistry of means” (Durant, 1926, 75). Hence, virtue can be viewed as a fruit of intelligent pursuit. The virtue of excellence, for example, can be achieved by training and habituation, and that a virtuous character is created by repeatedly acting in a virtuous manner (philonotes.com). But how can a person be virtuous? It is important to note that a virtuous behavior for Aristotle means practicing moderation, that is, avoiding both excess and deficiency (Temporal, Notes, 2016. See also the chapter on Aristotle’s virtue ethics). Aristotle calls this the doctrine of the mean. This “doctrine of the mean” is a principle that suggests that a moral behavior is one that is in the middle of two extremes. For example, between gain and disadvantage is justice, and between shameless and touchiness is modesty (Temporal). Indeed, moral virtue can be defined simply as the just mean (philonotes.com). Moral Character as Dispositions Dispositions are particular kinds of properties or characteristics that objects can possess. Examples of dispositions include the solubility of a sugar-cube in water, the fragility of porcelain, the elasticity of a rubber band, and the magnetism of a lodestone (Timpe, 2002). Moral character traits are those dispositions of character for which it is appropriate to hold agents morally responsible. A trait for which the agent is deserving of a positive reactive attitude, such as praise or gratitude, is a virtue, and a vice is a trait for which the agent is deserving of a negative reactive attitude, such as resentment or blame. Moral character traits are relatively stable, fixed and reliable dispositions of action and affect that ought to be rationally informed. The subsequent sub-sections will further elucidate these various aspects of moral character traits (Timpe, 2002). Moral character affects one’s moral decision. This character is a personality trait 1 Ethics- BatStateU or disposition that has become habituated in the individual moral agent. Indeed, it is something that is developed, nurtured and cultivated (philonotes.com). Moral character traits are not just dispositions to engage in certain outward behaviors; they can also be dispositions to have certain emotions or affections. For example, justice is the disposition to treat others as they deserve to be treated, while courageousness is the disposition to feel the appropriate amount of fear called for by a situation. Additionally, as mentioned above with regard to dispositions in general, an individual can have a particular moral character trait and not currently be manifesting trait-relevant behavior or affect. An individual may be generous in her giving to charity, even if she is not engaged presently in any charitable action (Timpe, 2002). It is important to consider that moral character is not something that is imposed from the outside, but something that springs from the will of the moral agent. Hence, a moral character develops as he/she grows into maturity. We may view moral character as a disposition or tendency to act or think in a specific way for which a person can be held morally responsible philonotes.com). The Circular Relation of Acts and Character The other side of the relation between moral character and action is the effect of action on character. Three aspects of action relevant to this are repetition of action and its effect on the person, the type of action, and intention and responsibility (Mitchell, 2015). A. Repetition of Action and its Effect on the Person Actions can be repetitive or automatic in (at least) three different ways: by habit, by education, and by habitus (Mitchell, 2015). When an action is constantly repeated, over time it can become a habit. For example, the physician who automatically writes a prescription for contraception for patients who ask and no longer thinks it through has acquired a habit. Another type of automatic action is a skill (education). Actions become skills through repetition and experience. For example, the baker automatically stops kneading the bread dough when it reaches a certain elasticity. These actions are done without consciously thinking through all the steps and reasoning and judgments. A third way actions become automatic is through what Aquinas calls habitus, that is, inclination or disposition, an inclination, a willingness, to respond charitably to anyone in need as the situation arises. For example, I see a person without a coat shivering in the middle of winter and give them my coat, and on and on (Mitchell, 2015). While this example is about charity, there is nothing about habitus that requires it to be good. One may also will to be miserly and act in a miserly way and therefore develop a bad disposition or habitus of miserliness. The morality of the action also determines the morality of the habitus. But not all acts can be cataloged as moral or immoral. There are different types or categories of actions (Mitchell, 2015). B. The Type of Action Because human beings are body/soul unities, actions of the body are actions of the self. Digestion of food is certainly an action, as is jumping when startled or yawning when tired. Aquinas calls these acts of a human being (actus humanus) and distinguishes them from human acts (actus humanis) (Mitchell, 2015). Human acts are rational acts and are more closely associated with character than are acts of human beings, because the former actions come from the whole person. Laughing at funny things is a moral act, in contrast to laughing because one is being tickled, Ethics- BatStateU which is an act of a human being. In the former, there is choice. One can choose to laugh or not. Laughing that is ridicule is a bad moral act. Laughing at oneself can be good (e.g., humbling). In fact, training oneself to not laugh at racist jokes or sexual innuendos is considered by many to be a moral responsibility (Mitchell, 2015). C. Intention and Responsibility Two important aspects of the revelatory nature of action are responsibility and intention. Human beings own their actions and the consequences of them. This even applies to actions that are accidental rather than willed and chosen. The will is the rational power of human beings to act. It is the ability to choose what is good (or what one thinks is good) directed by reason (Aquinas, 1948 and Wojtyla, 1979). Responsibility and intention are rooted in the will, which is the source of the self- possession and self-governance of human beings. Self-possession is different from possession of an object. One can own or hold an object, such as a rock, and therefore have possession of it. But one owns and holds oneself internally in a way one cannot with a rock. We are conscious of the rock as something that is external, but we are conscious of ourselves from the inside. We are both the object of our consciousness and the subject (Wrathall, 2005). One can be prevented from doing something by external forces, but carrying through with an action has an element of the voluntary, of willing to do it and therefore cannot be forced. For example, a physician may feel forced to write prescriptions for contraception through fear of ostracism or losing his job, but at the point at which he actually writes the prescription, he is no longer forced but actually willing the writing of the prescription (Aristotle, n.d. and Aquinas, 1993). Another way the will can be hindered is by lack of knowledge. One may attempt to drive across a flooded bridge thinking the water is low enough to get through but then get stuck, because it was really two feet above the bridge. But if one knows that the water is that high, one would not drive across it or will to drive across it, because one knows the car will stall in the middle (Aristotle, n.d., Aquinas, 1993 and Joh Paul I Pope, 1993). According to Mitchell (2015), the human being is self-governing in that he can carry out a human action or not carry it out as he wills. He can choose to write a prescription or chose not to write it. Because of self-possession and self-governance, human beings both intend their actions and have responsibility for their actions. 1 Ethics- BatStateU Learning Activity The following are the suggested activities: 1. Each group will analyze the lives of Nelson Mandela and Adolf Hitler. Make a presentation using Google slides. 2. Make a timeline graphic organizer based on personal experiences. Apply the three approaches of moral character development by indicating instances in their life and what they had learned from it. GRAPHIC ORGANIZER RUBRIC DIRECTIONS: Using the following criteria, choose the appropriate number from the following scale that reflects your assessment of the student’s work. 1 = Weak 2 = Moderately Weak 3 = Average 4 = Moderately Strong 5 = Strong 1. The graphic organizer has an appropriate title and labels. 2. The graphic organizer’s lines, boxes, and text are neat and legible. 3. The information in the graphic organizer is accurate. 4. The spelling, grammar, and punctuation of the text on the graphic organizer are accurate. 5. The graphic organizer presents the information in a manner that is easy to follow. 6. The relationships presented in the graphic organizer are correct and clear. 7. The form in which the graphic organizer portrays the information is appropriate to the relationships being represented. 8. The graphic organizer demonstrates an understanding of the topic, its relationships & related concepts. 9. The graphic organizer fulfills all the requirements of the assignment. 10. Overall, the graphic organizer represents the student’s full potential. TOTAL: Comments:_________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Ethics- BatStateU Learning Assessment Essay: Answer the following question: 11. Analyze which among the three approaches is commonly used by Filipinos during pandemic. Explain your answer by citing examples. ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Essay Rubric Points 5 4 3 2 1 Earned The essay is The essay is The essay is The essay is The essay fully focused consistently sufficiently minimally shows little IDEAS and contains focused and focused and focused. The or no focus a wealth of contains contains provided and the Controlling ideas and ample ideas some ideas examples are ideas are idea Supporting examples. and and vague or unclear, ideas The writer examples. examples. general and irrelevant, Use of details uses The writer The response the response or Awareness of rhetorical may employ is generally demonstrates repetitive. purpose strategies and rhetorical appropriate to minimal The Sense of addresses strategies or the awareness. response is completeness address 1 Ethics- BatStateU counterargum counterargum persuasive incomplete ents. ents. purpose. or too brief. The The The The The essay organization organization organization organization shows little ORGANIZATION of ideas is appropriate is generally is formulaic evidence of supports the and the appropriate or organizatio Introduction/bo writer’s sequencing of and the ideas inappropriate. n or dy/conclusion Sequence of focus. Ideas ideas is are clearly The response sequencing. ideas are grouped logical. sequenced, may lack a Transitions Grouping of in a logical Varied but may be clear are not ideas manner. transitions repetitive. introduction used. The Effective Effective and are used. Transitions or response is transitions varied are used conclusion. incomplete Awareness of transitions Transitions or too brief. purpose are used. are rare. The writer The language The language The language The utilizes and tone of and tone are and tone are language STYLE carefully the essay appropriate. uneven. and tone crafted enhance the Word choice Word choice are Sentence phrases to persuasive is adequate, is simple, inappropria variety Word choice create a purpose. but may be ordinary, or te. Word Audience sustained Word choice simple or repetitive. choice is awareness tone and an is ordinary. There is incorrect or Personal voice authoritative appropriate. Some minimal confusing. voice. Word Sentences are sentence variation in The choice varied. variety is sentence response is reflects an evident. length and incomplete advanced structure. or too brief. vocabulary. The writer The writer The writer The writer The writer demonstrates demonstrates demonstrates demonstrates lacks CONVENTIONS full command knowledge of sufficient minimal understandi of the the control of the control of the ng of the Sentence conventions conventions conventions conventions convention formation Subject-verb of written of written of written of written s of written agreement English English. English. English. English. Standard word language. No Errors are Errors may Errors are Errors are forms errors are minor and do interfere with frequent and pervasive. Punctuation, evident. not interfere meaning, but interfere with The spelling, and with are not meaning. response is capitalization meaning. distracting. Ethics- BatStateU incomplete or too brief. Learning References 4. De Guzman, J. M., Tesico, M. D., & Paras, W. D. (2017). Ethics Principles of Ethical Behavior in Modern Society. Malabon City: Mutya Publishing House, Inc 5. Cohen, T. R, & Carnegie, L. M. (2014). Moral Character: What it is and what is does. Accessed July 30, 2020 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264000952_Moral_character_What_it_is_and_wh at_it_does 6. Philonotes. Moral Development and the Moral Agents. Accessed August 5, 2020 https://philonotes.com/index.php/moral-development/ 7. Timpe, K. (2002). Moral Character. Accessed August 5, 2020 https://iep.utm.edu/moral-ch/ 8. Beauchamp, T. L. (2001). Philosophical Ethics (3rd ed). Boston: McGraw Hill. 9. Yarza, Ignatius (1994). History of Ancient Philosophy. Manila: Sinag-Tala Publishers. 10. Durant, W. (1926). The story of philosophy. New York: Washington Square Press. 11. Temporal, D. (2016). Notes on Ethics Training. Ateneo De Manila University. 12. Mitchell, L. A. (2015). Integrity and Virtue: The Forming of Good Character. Accessed August 5, 2020 doi: 10.1179/2050854915Y.0000000001 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4434789/ 13. Aquinas T. (1948). Summa theologiae. New York: Benziger Brothers. 14. Wojtyla K. (1979). The acting person, trans. Potocki Andrzej. 1969.Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company. 15. Wrathall M. A. (2005). Motives, reasons, and causes. In The Cambridge companion to Merleau-Ponty, ed. Carman Taylor, and Hansen Mark B.N.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 16. Aristotle n.d.Nicomachean ethics, trans. Ross W.D. Accessed August 5, 2020 http://people.bu.edu/wwildman/WeirdWildWeb/courses/wphil/readings/wphil_rdg09_nicho macheanethics_entire.htm. 17. Aquinas T. (1993). Commentary on Aristotle's Nicomachean ethics, translated by Litzinger C.I., O.P. 1964.Notre Dame, IN: Dumb Ox Books. 18. John Paul II Pope. 1993. Veritatis splendor. Accessed August 5, 2020 http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jpii_enc_060819 93_veritatis-splendor_en.html. 1 Ethics- BatStateU MODULE 9 STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT Introduction This module aims to discuss comprehensively the six stages of moral development. This lesson will develop the critical thinking and problem solving skills of students on real life scenarios. Further, this lesson will help them to identify which stage of moral development they reasoning may fall. This will also help them to develop a sense of morality and accountability. Lastly, this lesson will teach them analyze things and to be selfless. Learning Objectives At the end of the topic, students are expected to: h) Explain each stage of moral development. i) Determine in which stage of moral development they are now. j) Apply the stages of moral development. k) Create chart of their life’s journey. Learning Content The Six Stages of Moral Development Lawrence Kohlberg, (born October 25, 1927, Bronxville, New York, U.S.—died January 17, 1987, Boston, Massachusetts), American psychologist and educator known for his theory of moral development. Kohlberg was the youngest of four children of Alfred Kohlberg, a successful silk merchant of Jewish ancestry, and Charlotte Albrecht Kohlberg, a Protestant and a skilled amateur chemist. When the couple divorced in 1932 after 11 years of marriage, each of the children was required by a court order to choose which parent he or she would live with. The two younger children chose their father and the older ones chose their mother (Doorey, 2020). Lawrence Kohlberg’s stages of moral development, a comprehensive stage theory of moral development based on Jean Piaget’s theory of moral judgment for children (1932) and developed by Lawrence Kohlberg in 1958. Cognitive in nature, Kohlberg’s theory focuses on the thinking process that occurs when one decides whether a behaviour is right or wrong. Thus, the theoretical emphasis is on how one decides to respond to a moral dilemma, not what one decides Ethics- BatStateU or what one actually does (Sanders, n.d.). Piaget described a two-stage process of moral development (Scott, & Cogburn, 2020). Kohlberg extended Piaget's theory, proposing that moral development is a continual process that occurs throughout the lifespan. His theory outlines six stages of moral development within three different levels. The Heinz Dilemma Kohlberg based his theory on a series of moral dilemmas presented to his study subjects. Participants were also interviewed to determine the reasoning behind their judgments of each scenario (American Psychological Association, 2018). One example was "Heinz Steals the Drug." In this scenario, a woman has cancer and her doctors believe only one drug might save her. This drug had been discovered by a local pharmacist and he was able to make it for $200 per dose and sell it for $2,000 per dose. The woman's husband, Heinz, could only raise $1,000 to buy the drug.He tried to negotiate with the pharmacist for a lower price or to be extended credit to pay for it over time. But the pharmacist refused to sell it for any less or to accept partial payments. Rebuffed, Heinz instead broke into the pharmacy and stole the drug to save his wife. Kohlberg asked, "Should the husband have done that?" Kohlberg was not interested so much in the answer to whether Heinz was wrong or right but in the reasoning for each participant's decision. He then classified their reasoning into the stages of his theory of moral development (American Psychological Association, 2018). Theoretical Framework The framework of Kohlberg’s theory consists of six stages arranged sequentially in successive tiers of complexity. He organized his six stages into three general levels of moral development (Sanders, n.d.). Level 1: Preconventional level At the preconventional level, morality is externally controlled. Rules imposed by authority figures are conformed to in order to avoid punishment or receive rewards. This perspective involves the idea that what is right is what one can get away with or what is personally satisfying. Level 1 has two stages. Stage 1: Punishment/obedience orientation Behaviour is determined by consequences. The individual will obey in order to avoid punishment. Stage 2: Instrumental purpose orientation Behaviour is determined again by consequences. The individual focuses on receiving rewards or satisfying personal needs. Level 2: Conventional level At the conventional level, conformity to social rules remains important to the individual. However, the emphasis shifts from self-interest to relationships with other people and social systems. The individual strives to support rules that are set forth by others such as parents, peers, and the government in order to win their approval or to maintain social order. 1 Ethics- BatStateU Stage 3: Good Boy/Nice Girl orientation Behaviour is determined by social approval. The individual wants to maintain or win the affection and approval of others by being a “good person.” Stage 4: Law and order orientation Social rules and laws determine behaviour. The individual now takes into consideration a larger perspective, that of societal laws. Moral decision making becomes more than consideration of close ties to others. The individual believes that rules and laws maintain social order that is worth preserving. Level 3: Postconventional or principled level At the postconventional level, the individual moves beyond the perspective of his or her own society. Morality is defined in terms of abstract principles and values that apply to all situations and societies. The individual attempts to take the perspective of all individuals. Stage 5: Social contract orientation Individual rights determine behaviour. The individual views laws and rules as flexible tools for improving human purposes. That is, given the right situation, there are exceptions to rules. When laws are not consistent with individual rights and the interests of the majority, they do not bring about good for people and alternatives should be considered. Stage 6: Universal ethical principle orientation According to Kohlberg, this is the highest stage of functioning. However, he claimed that some individuals will never reach this level. At this stage, the appropriate action is determined by one’s self-chosen ethical principles of conscience. These principles are abstract and universal in application. This type of reasoning involves taking the perspective of every person or group that could potentially be affected by the decision. Kohlberg’s theory was highly influential, especially in psychology and education. No other account had provided such a detailed explanation of children’s moral development. Moreover, during a time when most psychologists were behaviorists, Kohlberg’s work broke new ground by concentrating on cognitive phenomena. His theory also received much criticism, however, most notably from the American psychologist Carol Gilligan, who argued that it ignored the distinct patterns of moral development exhibited by girls (Doorey, 2020). Ethics- BatStateU Learning Activity Directions: Draw a chart of their life’s journey using Manila paper or power point presentation or any computer applications applicable in this activity. The output will show moments of your life and where you are now based on moral development. Learning Assessment Directions: Each group will identify the stages of the agents in each case and justify their answer. 12. There are people suggesting that the Local Government Units shall disclose the personal details of patients with covid-19 so that they know if they had contacted that person days before the result of RT-PCR Test and also to protect their family’s health. However, there is a law which protects each covid-19 patient from discrimination. Analyze the act of those people and which stage of moral development their moral reasoning may fall. 13. A mother of two wrote a letter to the Elementary Principal. She requested that junk foods and soda should be banned in their school canteen. Her youngest son was hospitalized for several months due to kidney failure and needed to file leave of absence for early recovery. Her reason of writing a letter was not only for the welfare of his son but also for the welfare of all students in the school. However, the canteen was cooperative store where all teachers and some parents have shares and receive dividend every year. Part of their dividend is allotted to feeding program of the school where majority of the students benefitted. Which do you think needs to be addressed and why? 14. A scientist was alarmed on the continuous destruction of mother earth. Bodies of water are polluted, there are massive destruction of forests and there are animals which are now extinct. There are numerous natural disasters happening all over the world in a year and many lives are already gone. To save the mother earth, he made a virus that will control population. For him, controlling population will save the earth. Which moral reasoning a scientist’s behavior may fall? Do you think his action is morally right? Justify it using moral stages of development. 1 Ethics- BatStateU Learning References 19. Doorey, M. (2020). Lawrence Kohlberg. Accessed August 8, 2020 https://www.britannica.com/biography/Lawrence-Kohlberg 20. Scott H, & Cogburn M. Piaget. In: StatPearls [Internet]. StatPearls Publishing, updated May 24, 2020. 21. American Psychological Association. Heinz dilemma. Published 2018. 22. American Psychological Association. Kohlberg's theory of moral development. Published 2018. 23. Sanders, C. E. Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development. Accessed July 28, 2020 thttps://www.britannica.com/science/Lawrence-Kohlbergs-stages-of-moral-development Ethics- BatStateU MODULE 10 REASON AND IMPARTIALITY AS REQUIREMENTS FOR ETHICS Introduction In this module, students will learn the concepts of reason, morality, and impartiality. It will help them to think rationally what is good and what is bad; and to be just and fair to benefit not themselves but to benefit the majority. This module gives emphasis on the principle that every person is equally important and to give equal consideration to the interests of majority. Lastly, it will help students to develop their logical, rational and analytical thinking. Learning Objectives At the end of the topic, students are expected to: l) Discuss the ethical requirement of reason and impartiality. m) Discover different occupations where reasons, impartiality, and morality are part of their professions n) Apply reason and impartiality on the different societal issues. o) Develop possible solutions on the current situation of the country. Learning Content Reason and Impartiality Humans have not only feelings but also reason, and reason plays a vital role in Ethics. In fact, moral truths are truths of reason; that is, a moral judgement is true if it is espoused by better reasons than the alternatives (De Guzman et al. 2017). Reason is the ability of the mid to think, understand, and form judgments y a process of logic. It is an innate and exclusive human ability that utilizes new or existing information as bases to consciously make sense out of thing while applying logic. It is also associated with thinking, cognition, and intellect (“Reason and Impartiality as Minimum Requirement for Morality”). In the article “Kant and Hume on Morality,” Reason and experience are required for determining the likely effects of a given motive or character trait, so reason does play an important role in moral judgment. According to De Guzman et al. (2017), reason spells the difference of moral judgments from the mere expressions of personal preference. If after eating someone says, “I like a sweet cake,” he is not required to support it with good reasons for that is a statement about his/her personal taste and nothing more. But in the case of moral judgments, they require backing by reasons. In the absence of sensible rationale, they are merely capricious and ignorable. Moral deliberation is a matter of weighing reasons and being guided by them. In understanding the 1 Ethics- BatStateU nature of morality, considering reasons is indispensable. Truth in Ethics entails being justified by good reasons. That is, the rightful moral decision involves selecting the option that has the power of reason on its side. Being defined by good reasons, moral truths are objectives in the sense that they true no matter what we might want or think. We cannot make an act moral or immoral just by wishing it to be so, because we cannot merely will that the weight of reason be on its side or against it. And this also explains why morality is not arbitrary. Reason commends what it commends, regardless of our feelings, attitudes, opinions, and desires. Since the connection between moral judgments and reasons is necessary important, then a proposed theory on the nature of moral judgment should be able to give an account for the relation. In focusing on attitudes and feelings, both Emotivism and Subjectivism fail to accomplish this important thing De Guzman et al. 2017). As stated in the article “Reason and Impartiality as Minimum Requirement for Morality,” impartiality is manifesting objectivity. It is the quality of being unbiased and objective in creating moral decision – underscoring that a (morally) impartial person makes moral decisions relative to the welfare of the majority and not for specific people alone. According to De Guzman et al. (2017), impartiality involves the idea that each individual’s interest and point of view are equally important. Also called evenhandedness or fair-mindedness, impartiality is a principle of justice holding that decisions ought to be based on objective criteria, rather than on the basis of bias, prejudice, or preferring the benefits to one person over another for improper reasons. Impartiality in morality requires that we give equal and/or adequate consideration to the interests of all concerned parties. The principles of impartiality assumes that every person, generally speaking, is equally important; that is, no one is seen as intrinsically more significant than anyone else. Other ethicists however, suggest that some clarifications is required. From the impartial standpoint, to say that no one is seen as intrinsically more significant than anyone else, is not to say that there is no reason whatsoever for which an individual might demand more moral attention or better treatment than others. Many ethicists supposed that from the impartial point of view, properly conceived, some persons count as more significant, at least in certain ways. A virtous and respectable religious leader maybe supposed to be more significant than a mere maid; so an emergency (say, a building on fire) the decent religious leader ought to be rescued first. The reason, nonetheless, is not that the religious leader is intrinsically more significant; rather, it is that he makes greater contribution to the society (De Guzman et al. 2017). Why are Reason and Impartiality the Minimum Requirements for Morality? Is someone tells us that a certain action is immoral, we may ask why it is so, and if there is reasonable answer, we may discard the proposition as absurd. Also if somebody utters that a particular act is wrong and explains that it is because it does not happen to fits his taste, then we also do not count his claim as legitimate ethical judgment. Clearly, thus reason is a necessary requirement for morality (De Guzman et al. 2017). In the article “Impartiality,” it was stated that the only respect in which morality requires impartiality is with respect to violating moral rules—for example, those rules prohibiting killing, Ethics- BatStateU causing pain, deceiving, and breaking promises. It is only with regard to these kinds of moral rules—those that can be formulated as prohibitions—that it is humanly possible to act impartially with regard to a group large enough to be an appropriate group. As stated in the article “Reason and Impartiality as Minimum Requirement for Morality,” Reason and impartiality become the basic prerequisite for morality as one is excepted to be able to deliver clear, concise, rightful, and appropriate judgments made out of logic and understanding in an unbiased and unprejudiced manner while considering the general welfare to accurately concoct moral decisions. Learning Activity Directions: Each group will think 2 occupations or professionals. Using what they had learned from reason, impartiality, and morality, each group will create a persuasion map and write down all the facts, examples, and information to back up their reasoning. End your persuasion map with a conclusion. 1 Ethics- BatStateU GRAPHIC ORGANIZER RUBRIC DIRECTIONS: Using the following criteria, choose the appropriate number from the following scale that reflects your assessment of the student’s work. 1 = Weak 2 = Moderately Weak 3 = Average 4 = Moderately Strong 5 = Strong 11. The graphic organizer has an appropriate title and labels. 12. The graphic organizer’s lines, boxes, and text are neat and legible. 13. The information in the graphic organizer is accurate. 14. The spelling, grammar, and punctuation of the text on the graphic organizer are accurate. 15. The graphic organizer presents the information in a manner that is easy to follow. 16. The relationships presented in the graphic organizer are correct and clear. 17. The form in which the graphic organizer portrays the information is appropriate to the relationships being represented. 18. The graphic organizer demonstrates an understanding of the topic, its relationships & related concepts. 19. The graphic organizer fulfills all the requirements of the assignment. 20. Overall, the graphic organizer represents the student’s full potential. TOTAL: Comments:_________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ Learning Assessment Directions: Make a reaction paper on the following topics based on the principle of reason, impartiality, and morality. Provide pieces of evidence that will support your viewpoint and develop possible solutions on the following issues. 1. Covid-19 response of Department of Health.  Ethics- BatStateU 2. Alleged corruption and anomalies at PhilHeallth. 3. Passage of Anti-Terrorism Law 4. ABS-CBN franchise renewal 5. NCR and CALABARZON was under Modified ECQ again [Type the document title] Skills 5 4 3 2 1 Content and Analysis: -insightful clear ideas that Some ideas are The paper contains Ideas are not the extent to which and/or sophisticated fully clearer than others an attempt to developed. Little to the response conveys ideas that fully address address the and address the address the no textual evidence complex ideas and the prompt and are prompt and are prompt. Ideas are prompt, but the is used. fully supported by supported by supported by some writer provides little Mostly personal information clearly relevant, accurate and relevant, accurate relevant clear, relevant and responses. specific evidence from and sufficient evidence. evidence. accurately in order to appropriate sources. evidence. respond to the task Evidence used is Evidence used is and justified and clearly justified and support an analysis of developed. developed the text Organization The paper follows a The paper follows The paper follows The paper does not The paper does not clear and logical a logical train of a somewhat follow a train of follow a train of train of thought. thought. confused train of thought. The paper thought. The paper The introduction and The paper’s thought. is missing is missing conclusion are introduction and The paper has an introduction or an introduction and effective conclusion an introduction conclusion and the conclusion and the and the writer always are functional and conclusion writer uses few writer fails to use uses topic sentences and the writer and the writer topic sentences topic sentences and effective always uses some and/or transitions. and/or transitions. transitions uses topic topic sentences sentences but less and adequate effective transitions. transitions. Command of Quotations are Effectively Evidence is Evidence chosen Little or no Evidence smoothly blended in. utilizes present, but does not support evidence is used. Evidence is highly quotations, Superficial. Quotes ideas/claims. Quotes persuasive and Evidence is are used, but not are irrelevant. effective. believable and well blended. convincing. Reflections Conscious and Thoughtful Basic Ideas lack Does not address thorough understanding of understanding of development; the prompt or gives understanding of the the writing the writing misunderstanding of a basic plot writing prompt and prompt. Analysis prompt and the prompt or text; little summary without the subject matter. is believable subject matter. No to no reflection on commentary Creative/original and convincing, a in-depth the text. ideas and insights; few reflection. extensive, insightful assertions may commentary. lack specific examples, but are still logical. Mechanics and Demonstrates a Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrate a lack Conventions mastery of writing control of the control of the emerging control of of control of conventions conventions conventions conventions with conventions with Language use includes a variety of that do not with infrequent some errors that frequent errors that sentences marked by hinder errors, includes hinder make varying opening comprehension, minimal variety in comprehension, lacks 1 Ethics- BatStateU words and structure; includes some sentence structure variety in sentence comprehension effective syntax and variety in and transitions. structure and difficult. grammar. transitions and transitions. sentence structure. Learning References 24. Kant and Hume on Morality (2018) Accessed August 9, 2020 https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-hume-morality/#ReasEmotMora 25. Reason and Impartiality as Minimum Requirement for Morality. Accessed August 9, 2020 https://www.coursehero.com/file/44441436/Gr-5-Ethicspptx/ 26. De Guzman, J. M., Tesico, M. D., & Paras, W. D. (2017). Ethics Principles of Ethical Behavior in Modern Society. Malabon City: Mutya Publishing House, Inc. 27. Impartiality (2020). Accessed August 9, 2020 https://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and- maps/impartiality Ethics- BatStateU MODULE 11 FEELINGS AND REASON Introduction This module discusses the role of feelings and emotions in decision-making. Reason and emotions are jointly at work and tightly intertwined. This means that feelings are used as instinctive response to moral dilemmas. Feelings may sometimes prohibit us to make right decisions but it can also be used in making the right one. This concept will be explained by two theories of ethics which discuss the role of feeling on morality. Lastly, student shall be mindful of their own feelings, thoughts, and values as an indication of moral development. Learning Objectives At the end of the topic, students are expected to: p) Appraise and analyze their feelings in personal experiences q) Compare reasonable and emotional responses. r) Compare and contrast Ethical Subjectivism and Emotivism s) Apply the principles of Ethical Subjectivism and Emotivism Learning Content Feeling and Moral Decision-Making According to Ells (2014), emotion is a response to stimuli based on past experiences which is made instinctively while reason is a form of personal justification which changes from person to person based on their own ethical and moral code, as well as prior experience. Some ethicists believe that ethics is also a matter of emotion. They hold the moral judgment as thet are even deemed by some as instinctive and trained response to moral dilemmas (De Guzman et al. 2017). Emotions is the result of logical analysis through which we first analyze someone’s behavior, make an appropriate judgment, and then feel whichever is called for, respect or contempt (Pillemer & Wheeler, 2010). Researchers (and some philosophers) now see emotion and reason as tightly intertwined. Emotion and reason are jointly at work when we judge the conduct of others or make choices ourselves. A cognitive deficit of either type can impair our decision making capacity about all manner of things, including moral judgments. People who suffer certain kinds of brain injuries or 1 Ethics- BatStateU lesions, for example, retain the intellectual ability to understand alternative courses of action, nevertheless are unable to make up their own minds, both literally and figuratively. Reading a menu apparently is one thing, but choosing among items involves weighing likes, dislikes, objectives, and values. These necessarily involve subjective judgments (Pillemer & Wheeler, 2010). Some hold that reason and emotion are not really opposite. Both abstract inference and emotional intuitions or instincts are seen as having relative roles in ethical thinking. For one thing, feelings or emotions are said to be judgments about the accomplishment of one’s goals. Emotions, it is thus concluded, can be rational in being based at least sometimes on good judgments about how well a circumstance or agent accomplishes appropriate objectives. Feelings are also visceral or instinctual by providing motivations to act morally (De Guzman et al. 2017). Reason when removed from emotion, allows a person to make conscious decisions based on fact, with no references to personal involvement. The use of reason as a way of knowing, allows for the knower to see the consequences of their actions through-out the decision-making process. Also, there are limitations to decisions made based on reason alone, perception of situations is not questioned as it may be with an emotional decision (Ells, 2014). Feeling-based Theories in Ethics There are at least two theories in ethics that gives focus on the role of feelings on morality. They are (1) Ethical Subjectivism and (2) Emotivism (De Guzman et al. 2017). 1. Ethical Subjectivism. This theory basically utter runs contrary to the principle that there is objectivity in morality. Fundamentally a meta-ethically theory, it is not about what things are good and what are things are bad. It does not tell how we should live or what moral norms we should practice. Instead, it is a theory about the nature or moral judgments (De Guzman et al. 2017). In the article “Basics of Philosophy,” Ethical Subjectivism holds that there are no objective moral properties and that ethical statements are in fact arbitrary because they do not express immutable truths. Instead, moral statements are made true or false by the attitudes and/or conventions of the observers, and any ethical sentence just implies an attitude, opinion, personal preference or feeling held by someone. Thus, for a statement to be considered morally right merely means that it is met with approval by the person of interest. Another way of looking at this is that judgments about human conduct are shaped by, and in many ways limited to, perception. As cited in the article “Basics of Philosophy,” there are several different variants which can be considered under the heading of Ethical Subjectivism: Simple Subjectivism: the view (largely as described above) that ethical statements reflect sentiments, personal preferences and feelings rather than objective facts. Individualist Subjectivism: the view (originally put forward by Protagoras) that there are as many distinct scales of good and evil as there are individuals in the world. It is effectively Ethics- BatStateU a form of Egoism, which maintains that every human being ought to pursue what is in his or her self-interest exclusively. Moral Relativism (or Ethical Relativism): the view that for a thing to be morally right is for it to be approved of by society, leading to the conclusion that different things are right for people in different societies and different periods in history. Ideal Observer Theory: the view that what is right is determined by the attitudes that a hypothetical ideal observer (a being who is perfectly rational, imaginative and informed) would have. 2. Emotivism. As cited in the “Emotive Theory of Ethics” The term emotivism refers to a theory about moral judgments, sentences, words, and speech acts; it is sometimes also extended to cover aesthetic and other nonmoral forms of evaluation. Although sometimes used to refer to the entire genus, strictly speaking emotivism is the name of only the earliest version of ethical noncognitivism (also known as expressivism and nondescriptivism). Emotivism is actually the most popular form of non-cognitivism, the meta-ethical theory that claims that ethical sentences do not convey authentic propositions. Moral judgments, according to Emotivism, are not statements of fact but are mere expressions of the emotions of the speaker especially since they are usually feelings—based (De Guzman et al. 2017). To understand how the theory views moral judgments, it would help to note that language is used in a variety of ways. Principally, language is used to state facts or what we believe to be facts. But there are other purpose for which language may be used like utterance or command. The purposes of utterances are (1) they are used as means of influencing other’s behavior and (2) moral sentences are used to expresses (not report) the speaker’s attitude (De Guzman et al. 2017). As cited in the article “Emotivism,” Emotivists believe that moral language expresses emotions and tries to influence others; it has no cognitive content. If I say homosexuality is evil, I’m just expressing my feeling that homosexuality is disgusting! I am expressing my emotions and, at the same time, trying to influence you to dislike homosexuality. The same analysis applies to any moral judgment. If I say that capital punishment is wrong, I’m just expressing my dislike for it and trying to get you to agree with me. I might as well have said capital punishment while shaking my head and rolling my eyes. And if I say that Stalin or Cheney were bad men—which they were—I’m merely trying to get you to agree with what I’m really saying. Criticisms on Ethical Subjectivism and Emotivism Stated in the article “Subjectivism,” subjectivism implies the moral statements are less significant than most people think they are – this may of course be true without rendering moral statement insignificant. More so, Ethical Subjectivism has implications that are contrary to what we believe about the nature of moral judgments.it also implies that each of us is infallible so as long as we are honestly expressing our respective feelings about moral issues. Furthermore, it cannot account for the fact of disagreement in Ethics. Finally, the theory could also have dangerous implications in moral education (De Guzman et al. 2017). 1 Ethics- BatStateU As cited in the article “Emotivism,” emotivism presupposes that moral disagreements are incapable of being resolved by rational discourse. There is no way to resolve our attitudinal disagreements unless we are persuasive enough (or violent enough). But we have already seen that there’s another way to persuade—using reason to support our position. We can provide good reasons why x is right or x is wrong. If we appeal to reason, we have discovered a way to resolve our disputes that other than by shouting or beating others into submission. And if reason plays a role in ethics, then there is truth or falsity about ethical judgments. Feelings Can Help in Making the Right Decision According to Pillemer & Wheeler (2010), moral development may rest in our ability to be mindful of our own feelings, thoughts, and values—and the context in which we are functioning. As we ponder decisions, and more fundamentally, our principles, Pillemer & Wheeler (2010), enumerated some precepts to bear mind. Among them are: 1. Don’t accept the problem as given. How choices are framed can sway your choices in ways that may contradict your core beliefs. (Think of the classic experiment about health care policy.) Generate multiple options and assess them against one another instead of considering them in isolation. 2. Listen to both your heart and head. Issues of right and wrong matter deeply to us, as they should. Twinges of disgust or shame may be internal signals that we are nearing the outer bounds of acceptable behavior. But we should also reflect on the sources of our feelings, be they negative or positive, as they may be triggered by associations that have nothing to do with the matter at hand. 3. Watch your language. How we name things exposes (or masks) the nature of our actions and their consequences. Firings become layoffs, layoffs become downsizing, and downsizing becomes right-sizing. The action may be unavoidable, but we should not sugarcoat the fact that people who once worked with or for us are now jobless. 4. Take special care in dimly lit places. Your actions—and ultimately even your values—are influenced by the company you keep. 5. Be modest about your virtue. Most of us believe that we are more ethical than are others. Countless experiments and real life examples, however, should remind us that people who are most self-righteous may be most likely to slip. 6. Understand why others transgress. Some lapses may be due to moral failure, but others can be caused by external factors that have little to do with their fundamental nature. Luck plays a role in regard to how people are tested and what resources they can draw upon. Refrain from judging a person’s core character, positively or negatively, on the basis of a single event. 7. Don’t give up on yourself (or on others). An ancient proverb says, “Every saint has a past. Every sinner has a future.” Honest reflection about the past, coupled with a measure of humility, can serve as foundation for leading a responsible life going forward. Ethics- BatStateU In the end, morality is not merely—or even principally—determining the right thing to do in specific instances, rather it entails who we want to be and what kind of life we want to lead (Pillemer & Wheeler, 2010). Learning Activity Directions: The following are the suggested activities 1. Case analysis. Analyze the following cases with your group members and justify your answer based on what you have learned from the topic. A. You are a high-ranking public health official who must decide how to respond in the face of an epidemic that will cost 600 lives if nothing is done. You only have two alternatives: Option A which will result in 200 lives being saved or Option B with a 1/3 chance that everyone would be saved. Which would you choose? B. Dan, a student council president, often picks topics for discussion that appeal to both professors and students in order to stimulate discussion. Would you say that his conduct is highly immoral, not immoral at all, or someplace in between? C. What if instead of throwing the switch, the only way for you to stop the train and save the five is pushing a 300-pound man on to the tracks? 2. Recall a news report that you have seen recently. Illustrate your feelings as instinctive response to the news. Learning Assessment Directions: The class will be divided into six group. Each group will play a wheel of fortune game prepared earlier by their teacher. Each part of the wheel has topic to be used in the class debate. Each group have only chance to roll the wheel. The topic where the pointer ends would be the group’s topic. The following are the options written in the wheel of fortune 15. Affirmative Team – End of life involving a dying parent 16. Negative Team – End of life involving a dying parent 17. Affirmative Team – Payment of facilitation fee to a customs officer by a finance employee 18. Negative Team – Payment of facilitation fee to a customs officer by a finance employee 19. Affirmative Team - The use of an official car to bring a four-year old daughter to school everyday 20. Negative Team - The use of an official car to bring a four-year old daughter to school everyday 1 Ethics- BatStateU Rubric on the Levels of Performance for AFFIRMATIVE Team Criteria 4 3 2 1 Grade: 1. Organization & Completely Mostly clear Clear in some Unclear and Clarity: clear and and orderly in parts but not disorganized orderly all parts overall throughout Main arguments and presentation responses are outlined in a clear and orderly way. 2. Use of Argument: Very strong Many good Some decent Few or no real and persuasive arguments arguments, but arguments given, Reasons are given to arguments given, with some or all arguments support the resolution given only minor significant given had throughout problems problems significant problems 3. Use of cross- Excellent Good cross- Decent cross- Poor cross-exam examination and cross-exam exam and exam and/or or rebuttals, rebuttal: and defense rebuttals, with rebuttals, but failure to point against only minor with some out problems in Identification of Negative slip-ups significant Negative team’s weakness in Negative team’s problems position or team’s arguments and objections failure to defend ability to defend itself itself against against attack. attack. 4. Presentation Style: All style Most style Few style Very few style features were features were features were features were Tone of voice, clarity used used used used, none of of expression, convincingly convincingly convincingly them precision of arguments convincingly all contribute to keeping audience’s attention and persuading them of the team’s case. TOTAL SCORE: _____ (Divide by 4) AVERAGE FOR AFFIRMATIVE TEAM: _______ STUDENT NUMBER (to remain confidential): _______________________________ Ethics- BatStateU Rubric on the Levels of Performance for NEGATIVE Team Criteria 4 3 2 1 Grade: 1. Organization & Completely Mostly clear Clear in some Unclear and Clarity: clear and and orderly in parts but not disorganized orderly all parts overall throughout Main arguments and presentation responses are outlined in a clear and orderly way. 2. Use of Argument: Very strong Many good Some decent Few or no real and persuasive arguments arguments, but arguments given, Reasons are given arguments given, with some or all arguments against the resolution given only minor significant given had throughout problems problems significant problems 3. Use of cross- Excellent Good cross- Decent cross- Poor cross-exam examination and cross-exam exam and exam and/or or rebuttal, rebuttal: and defense rebuttal, with rebuttal, but failure to point against only minor with some out problems in Identification of Affirmative slip-ups significant Affirmative weakness in team’s problems team’s position Affirmative team’s objections or failure to arguments and ability defend itself to defend itself against against attack. attack. 4. Presentation Style: All style Most style Few style Very few style features were features were features were features were Tone of voice, clarity used used used used, none of of expression, convincingly convincingly convincingly them precision of arguments convincingly all contribute to keeping audience’s attention and persuading them of the team’s case. TOTAL SCORE: _______ (Divide by 4) AVERAGE FOR NEGATIVE TEAM: _______ STUDENT NUMBER (to remain confidential): _______________________________ 1 Ethics- BatStateU Learning References 28. Pillemer, J. & Wheeler, M. (2010). Moral Decision-Making: Reason, Emotion & Luck. Accessed August 8, 2020 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228147434_Moral_Decision- Making_Reason_Emotion_Luck 29. De Guzman, J. M., Tesico, M. D., & Paras, W. D. (2017). Ethics Principles of Ethical Behavior in Modern Society. Malabon City: Mutya Publishing House, Inc. 30. Ells, O. (2014). Accessed August 8, 2020 https://prezi.com/tfqmvcyiv0lb/what-roles-do- emotion-and-reason-play-in-ethics/?fallback=1 31. https://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_ethical_subjectivism.html 32. The Basics of Philosophy. Accessed August 8, 2020 https://www.philosophybasics.com/branch_ethical_subjectivism.html 33. Subjectivism. Accessed August 8, 2020 http://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/introduction/subjectivism.shtml#:~:text=Bad%20points%20of %20subjectivism,without%20rendering%20moral%20statements%20insignificant. 34. Emotivism (2016). Accessed August 8, 2020 https://reasonandmeaning.com/2016/11/26/emotivism/ 35. Emotive Theory of Ethics (2019). Accessed August 8, 2020 https://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and- maps/emotive-theory-ethics Ethics- BatStateU MODULE 12 THE 7-STEP MORAL REASONING Learning Objectives At the end of the topic, students are expected to: t) Understand the different the 7-step moral reasoning model u) Apply the 7 steps of moral reasoning in his/ her decision making. Learning Content To ensure the reasonableness and neutrality of moral decisions, it is good to follow the seven-step moral reasoning model. These steps can serve as a guide in making best choices in decision makings. 1. Stop and think. Before making any decisions, it is nice to take a moment to think about the following: a. Situation itself b. Your role in the situation c. Other internal/ external factors such as People who might get involved in the result of the decision Potential effects of the decision 2. Clarify Goals. In a decision making, it is essential to determine your goals both short-term and long-term goals. Short-term goals are those that need to be accomplished right after or immediately after a decision is made. A long-term goal is that which the result may come out after some times. It is important because that is going to be the basis of what one wishes to accomplish. Sometimes, it requires a sacrifice for someone just to achieve his or her goal whether short or long term one. 3. Determine facts. Make sure that that all essential information is considered before you make a decision. To determine the facts, solve first what you know, then what do you still need to know. Have a heart to accept other information about the subject of your decision- making process and make it sure that facts are reliable and credible since these facts would be the basis of your decision. In addition: 1 Ethics- BatStateU a. Consider the reliability and credibility of the people providing the facts. b. Consider the basis of the supposed facts. Evaluate on the basis of honesty, accuracy, and memory. 4. Develop options. Once you know what you the goals are and facts are well considered already, then you can make a list of actions that are possibly be your options. If its about life decision, you can make talk to someone you trust most so you can broaden your perspective and think of new choices. If you can think of only one or two choices, you are probably not thinking hard enough. 5. Consider consequences. After developing options which are possibly your basis of action, you must consider consequences of each option. Filter your choices to determine if any of your options will violate any ethical considerations, and then omit unethical options. Think of its long long-term consequences and act in accordance to the spirit of fairness and justice. Identify who will be affected by your decision and how the decision is a likely to affect them. 6. Choose. After consideration of all the consequences from the options, make a decision now. If you are doubtful of your choice, try the following: a. Talk to people whom you trust. b. Think of someone who you think has the character of good decision maker. c. If people around you found out your decision, would you be comfortable and proud? d. Follow the Golder Rule: treat others the way you want to be treated, and keep your promises. 7. Monitor and modify. Ethical decision makers monitor the effect of their decisions and are willing to modify their decision. Though it takes a lot of humility and courage to do such, it is necessary if the decision had been made has a lot of ethical considerations. Do not hesitate to revise your decisions in light of new developments in the situation. Learning Activity Directions: In a sheet of paper try this: Ethics- BatStateU 1. Narrate the greatest decision you ever did in your life so far. Whether you applied it or not already, try to it once more using this 7 step moral reasoning. Learning Assessment Directions: in your own words, how will you define and explain each step in moral reasoning. 1. Stop and think. 2. Clarify Goals. 3. Determine facts. 4. Develop options. 5. Consider consequences. 6. Choose. 7. Monitor and modify. Essay Rubric Points 5 4 3 2 1 Earned The essay is The essay is The essay is The essay is The essay fully focused consistently sufficiently minimally shows little IDEAS and contains focused and focused and focused. The or no focus a wealth of contains contains provided and the Controlling ideas and ample ideas some ideas examples are ideas are idea Supporting examples. and and vague or unclear, ideas The writer examples. examples. general and irrelevant, Use of details uses The writer The response the response or Awareness of rhetorical may employ is generally demonstrates repetitive. purpose strategies and rhetorical appropriate to minimal The Sense of addresses strategies or the awareness. response is completeness counterargum address persuasive incomplete ents. counterargum purpose. or too brief. ents. The The The The The essay organization organization organization organization shows little ORGANIZATION of ideas is appropriate is generally is formulaic evidence of supports the and the appropriate or organizatio Introduction/bo writer’s sequencing of and the ideas inappropriate. n or dy/conclusion Sequence of focus. Ideas ideas is are clearly The response sequencing. ideas are grouped logical. sequenced, may lack a Transitions Grouping of in a logical Varied but may be clear are not ideas manner. repetitive. introduction used. The Effective and or response is 1 Ethics- BatStateU Effective varied transitions Transitions conclusion. incomplete transitions transitions are used. are used Transitions or too brief. Awareness of are used. are rare. purpose The writer The language The language The language The utilizes and tone of and tone are and tone are language STYLE carefully the essay appropriate. uneven. and tone crafted enhance the Word choice Word choice are Sentence phrases to persuasive is adequate, is simple, inappropria variety Word choice create a purpose. but may be ordinary, or te. Word Audience sustained Word choice simple or repetitive. choice is awareness tone and an is ordinary. There is incorrect or Personal voice authoritative appropriate. Some minimal confusing. voice. Word Sentences are sentence variation in The choice varied. variety is sentence response is reflects an evident. length and incomplete advanced structure. or too brief. vocabulary. The writer The writer The writer The writer The writer demonstrates demonstrates demonstrates demonstrates lacks CONVENTIONS full command knowledge of sufficient minimal understandi of the the control of the control of the ng of the Sentence conventions conventions conventions conventions convention formation Subject-verb of written of written of written of written s of written agreement English English. English. English. English. Standard word language. No Errors are Errors may Errors are Errors are forms errors are minor and do interfere with frequent and pervasive. Punctuation, evident. not interfere meaning, but interfere with The spelling, and with are not meaning. response is capitalization meaning. distracting. incomplete or too brief. Learning References 1. Pasco, M. O., Suarez, V. F., & Rodriguez, A. M. (2018). Ethics. Quezon City: C & E Publishing, Inc. Ethics- BatStateU MODULE 13 REASON AND WILL Learning Objectives At the end of the topic, students are expected to: a) To understand the meaning of reason and will; b) Compare and contrast the reason and will. c) To apply these two concepts in their daily lives. Learning Content What is Reason? In philosophy, reason, is the faculty or process of drawing logical syllogism. Reasoning is the process of drawing out conclusion from the previous knowledge. In other words, reason is associated with knowledge. Knowledge is something that one acquires as he studies, gets matured and professional. The term reason is also used in other context as a disagreement to sensation, perception, feeling, and desire. According to Immanuel Kant, reason is the power of producing into oneness, by means of understandable theories, the concepts that are provided by the intellect or the mind. The foundation of sound ethics for him can only be by the authority of human reason. The voice of God- conscience for St. Thomas Aquinas- is not heard directly today while man is living in this finite world. That reason which gives a priori principles Kant calls “pure reason,” as distinguished from the “practical reason,” which is especially concerned with the performance of actions. The reason elects such and such as morally binding and thus act in accordance with what he/she this is so. Kant told that reason in itself can only be sensible foundation of what is ethical for man. It also reiterated that morality is grounded with external authority but it is simply grounded with reason itself. Kant certainly wanted to delimit the bounds of reason, but this is not the same as arguing that it has no role in our knowledge. There are three points in Kant’ reason: 1. the relation of reason to empirical truth; 2. reason’s role in scientific inquiry; and 3. the positive gains that come from appreciating reason’s limits. 1 Ethics- BatStateU In theology, reason, as distinguished from faith, is the human intelligence exercised upon religious truth whether by way of discovery or by way of explanation. The limits within which the reason may be used have been laid down differently in different churches and periods of thought: on the whole, modern Christianity, especially in the Protestant churches, tends to allow to reason a wide field, reserving, however, as the sphere of faith the ultimate (supernatural) truths of theology. What is the will? If the reason is the foundation of what is ethical for Kant, in turn, its source must be a goodwill. This means that what is morally binding is rooted in reason as workable for the human person who possesses the goodwill. A good will is also a force to pursue what one possesses in mind also. Instead of looking at a man as he displays external attributes, goodness is in the very interiority of himself. The good that is relevant to the person who through his/her reason knows what one ought to do. The good will implies the achievability of what is known though reason. Generally, will is a faculty od the mind that at the moment of decision is always present. For him, there is only one good which can be called good without any qualification- the good motive or good will. The true object of reason is to produce a will which is good in itself, since nothing else is always and necessarily good. This will must be autonomous in nature because the will’s autonomy will make a man a dignified one. To lose one’s freewill is to lose one’s dignity. In a nutshell, Reason is the foundation of morality and the source of is the goodwill. For example, the basis of our actions is our prior knowledge of somethings. The purpose of why we wish to buy rubber shoes is that because we have prior knowledge that rubber shoes is good for sports. To insist and the actual purchase of the rubber shoes, our will pushed us to do so. Learning Activity Directions: Make a simple essay about your future wishes/ dreams. Consider the following questions? 1. What do you really want in your life? 2. What are the factors that made you realize what you want? 3. What are the ways are you going to do to achieve what you want in your life? Ethics- BatStateU Learning Assessment Directions: Answer this for 20 points. 1. What come first, reason or the will? Defend your answer showing some other literatures/ evidences. Essay Rubric Points 5 4 3 2 1 Earned The essay is The essay is The essay is The essay is The essay fully focused consistently sufficiently minimally shows little IDEAS and contains focused and focused and focused. The or no focus a wealth of contains contains provided and the Controlling idea ideas and ample ideas some ideas examples are ideas are Supporting examples. and and vague or unclear, ideas The writer examples. examples. general and irrelevant, Use of details uses The writer The response the response or Awareness of rhetorical may employ is generally demonstrates repetitive. purpose strategies and rhetorical appropriate to minimal The Sense of addresses strategies or the awareness. response is completeness counterargum address persuasive incomplete ents. counterargum purpose. or too brief. ents. The The The The The essay organization organization organization organization shows little ORGANIZATION of ideas is appropriate is generally is formulaic evidence of supports the and the appropriate or organizatio Introduction/bo writer’s sequencing of and the ideas inappropriate. n or dy/conclusion Sequence of focus. Ideas ideas is are clearly The response sequencing. ideas are grouped logical. sequenced, may lack a Transitions Grouping of in a logical Varied but may be clear are not ideas manner. transitions repetitive. introduction used. The Effective Effective and are used. Transitions or response is transitions varied are used conclusion. incomplete Awareness of transitions Transitions or too brief. purpose are used. are rare. 1 Ethics- BatStateU The writer The language The language The language The utilizes and tone of and tone are and tone are language STYLE carefully the essay appropriate. uneven. and tone crafted enhance the Word choice Word choice are Sentence phrases to persuasive is adequate, is simple, inappropria variety Word choice create a purpose. but may be ordinary, or te. Word Audience sustained Word choice simple or repetitive. choice is awareness tone and an is ordinary. There is incorrect or Personal voice authoritative appropriate. Some minimal confusing. voice. Word Sentences are sentence variation in The choice varied. variety is sentence response is reflects an evident. length and incomplete advanced structure. or too brief. vocabulary. The writer The writer The writer The writer The writer demonstrates demonstrates demonstrates demonstrates lacks CONVENTIONS full command knowledge of sufficient minimal understandi of the the control of the control of the ng of the Sentence conventions conventions conventions conventions convention formation Subject-verb of written of written of written of written s of written agreement English English. English. English. English. Standard word language. No Errors are Errors may Errors are Errors are forms errors are minor and do interfere with frequent and pervasive. Punctuation, evident. not interfere meaning, but interfere with The spelling, and with are not meaning. response is capitalization meaning. distracting. incomplete or too brief. Learning References 1. Williams, Garrath, "Kant's Account of Reason", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL =. 2. Pasco, M. O., Suarez, V. F., & Rodriguez, A. M. (2018). Ethics. Quezon City: C & E Publishing, Inc. Ethics- BatStateU MODULE 14 MORAL THEORIES Learning Objectives At the end of the topic, students are expected to: a) determine the difference between morality and ethics b) understand the different moral theories c) differentiate between moral theories. Learning Content The words "moral" and "ethics" (and cognates) are often used interchangeably. However, it is useful to make the following distinction: Morality is the system through which we determine right and wrong conduct -- i.e., the guide to good or right conduct. Ethics is the philosophical study of Morality. What, then, is a moral theory? A theory is a structured set of statements used to explain (or predict) a set of facts or concepts. A moral theory, then, explains why a certain action is wrong -- or why we ought to act in certain ways. In short, it is a theory of how we determine right and wrong conduct. Also, moral theories provide the framework upon which we think and discuss in a reasoned way, and so evaluate, specific moral issues. Seen in this light, it becomes clear that we cannot draw a sharp divide between moral theory and applied ethics (e.g., medical or business ethics). For instance, in order to critically evaluate the moral issue of affirmative action, we must not attempt to evaluate what actions or policies are right (or wrong) independent of what we take to determine right and wrong conduct. You will see, as we proceed, that we do not do ethics without at least some moral theory. When evaluating the merits of some decision regarding a case, we will always (or at least ought to always) find ourselves thinking about how right and wrong is determined in general, and then apply that to the case at hand. Note, though, that sound moral thinking does not simply involve going one way -- from theory to applied issue. Sometimes a case may suggest that we need to change or adjust our thinking about what moral theory we think is the best, or perhaps it might lead us to think that a preferred theory needs modification. Are moral theories descriptive or prescriptive? In presenting a moral theory, are we merely describing how people, in their everyday 'doings' and 'thinkings,' form a judgment about what is right and wrong, or are we prescribing how people ought to make these judgments? 1 Ethics- BatStateU Most take moral theories to be prescriptive. The descriptive accounts of what people do are left to sociologists and anthropologists. Philosophers, then, when they study morality, want to know what is the proper way of determining right and wrong. There have been many different proposals. Here is a brief summary.