Western Ethics (Part 1) PDF

# ETHICS/Part One ## AN EXPOSE OF WESTERN AND EASTERN ETHICS - We do not intend to provide a comparative study between Western and Eastern ethics. - The reason behind is that when we compare them the effect would be disadvantageous to any one of them. - When one compares, one necessarily envisag...

# ETHICS/Part One ## AN EXPOSE OF WESTERN AND EASTERN ETHICS - We do not intend to provide a comparative study between Western and Eastern ethics. - The reason behind is that when we compare them the effect would be disadvantageous to any one of them. - When one compares, one necessarily envisages to find which is superior and which is inferior between the objects under comparison. - Categorically it is not good to speak of superior ethics or inferior ethics, just as it is equally wrong to speak of a backward morality in contradiction to an advanced or progressive morality. - In principle, no ethics is higher in degree than any other. - This means that Western and Eastern ethics should be given equal footing in importance. - One is not higher than the other by virtue of the fact that ethics or morality is based on absolute and universal laws. - Obviously, there exists a difference in views of morality as a reflection of actual life situations. - In fact, this is why there seems to be manifold kinds of ethical insights, theories, and principles. - Generally, Western ethics teaches that man has a self; that man is an individual; and that man is a person. - This, as a whole, points to the direction of Western ethics which is personalism. - The "ought" of Western ethics, obligates man to be a self, to be what he is, and to be a person. - On the contrary, Eastern ethics, generally does not teach that man is a self; instead, it teaches a doctrine of "many selves." - With this spectrum, man is not treated as an individual or as a person, but as a being among other beings who is tasked to harmonize his very existence with his fellow human beings, and the word or nature in its generic sense. ## Chapter 1: WESTERN ETHICS - Let us begin this topic with a brief historical survey of Western ethics. - The moral life in ancient Greece developed when a Greek performed his duties as a citizen, e.g., paying taxes to the government. - To the Greeks, a man who performs his duties is a good man. - This gave rise to the concept of how it is to be good. - During the medieval period, the moral life was dominated by the Church and generally speaking, the good life was identified with the holy life or the religious life. - Thus, the moral standards during this time were geared towards salvation. - In the modern period, a revolt against the Catholic Church has occurred. - This period is characterized by man's persistent dissociation from what had been the medieval man's source of moral life (i.e., the Church) because morality is more concerned with free individuals. - Today, ethics is mainly conditioned by two influences, namely: the free reflections that arose in the Greek city states and the moral tradition of Judeo-Christians that was taught by the Church of the Middle Ages. - Moral standards that originated from the Eastern moralities are also included here. - In fact, Buddhism and Hinduism, in their different forms, are starting to be embraced by some of the Westerners, like the Americans and Europeans. - **A. Greek Ethics** - Inasmuch as it is the great Greek triumvirate philosophers - Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle - who started to fashion morality in a systematic order, it is perhaps good to say a few words about them. - Socratic, Platonic, and Aristotelian ethics may perhaps be classified as ethics of self-realization. - In their ethical treatises, they try to emphasize the personhood of every individual. - In their ethics, they highlight the self of every man as being confronted with the demands of living a good life. - In general, Greek ethics tries to provide an answer to the moral question: What is the good life? - Socrates answers this through his concept of knowledge and virtue or goodness. - So if happiness is the ultimate end of human actions for Socrates, man can be happy if he is wise, meaning he is a good man or a virtuous man because he knows and does what is good. - Plato and Aristotle, respectively, took hold of and developed the moral teaching of Socrates and started to introduce their own. - **1. Ethical Teaching of Socrates** - Socrates is considered as the greatest moral philosopher of Western civilization. - His philosophy is evidently ethical rather than ontological. - His epistemology is always geared towards a moral life, to the effect that whenever he speaks of truth, he always sees to it that it is at the same time a discourse of will and that whenever he speaks of knowledge, he always makes it a point that his audience will realize that knowledge is not an entity for its own sake but a means of ethical action. - Socrates taught that knowledge and truth provoke the will to act for the good so that the agent can live right or good moral life. - For Socrates, a person can act correctly and well if he knows what is good life. - The philosopher argues that knowledge and virtue (Arete) cannot be considered distinct from each other. - So, a wise man, for Socrates, does what is right because he knows what is right. - Action is taken by Socrates as the extension of knowledge, just as one cannot act correctly if one does not know what is correct action. - It follows, therefore, that for Socrates the wise man is good and the good man is wise. - However, correct or right action does not necessarily mean good action, because correctness is different from goodness, just as wrongness is different from badness (this actually falls under metaethics). - The correctness and wrongness of actions are based on existing principles, such that one's action is right or correct if it conforms with a given principle. - On the other hand, badness and wrongness of actions are based on the quality of the act. - An action is good if it bears a good quality and bad if it yields a bad quality. - Hence, an action for Socrates is right if it serves man truly – in the sense of enhancing his authentic happiness (eudaimonism). - Now, Socrates says that knowing what is right means doing what is right. - The tacit meaning of this is that no person opts to do evil per se. - Ergo, for Socrates, a person does evil out of ignorance. - In other words, Socrates is telling us that correctness of one's action is a projection of the good. - For him, the will of man always aims at the good. - No individual person volitionally does evil, because the will cannot aim at the bad or evil; Socrates believes that a person does evil only indirectly. - Put in a moral spectrum, a person is not imputable of doing a wrong action which he does not know. - For the philosopher, the agent may fail to do what is right not because he is morally weak but because of his ignorance of what is right. - Now, the query to be posited is "Who is a wise person?" - A wise person for Socrates is not a type of a mentally undisciplined individual, but that of a well-cultured person. - A wise man, having known what is right, knows how to control himself; he is just and courageous. - For the thinker, a wise person is happy. - The measure of this happiness is not material possession, but in being moral. - To Socrates, true pleasure (which is doing what is right) will offer a person lasting happiness, which will eventually make him a moral being. - If one therefore wishes to be happy, he should be wise, for wisdom itself is its own reward. - In sum, Socrates is heading to an idea that ethics embodies a fundamental principle. - This fundamental principle is man's supreme goal which is happiness which man can attain by doing what is right. - Now, this fundamental principle (happiness) demands two things, i.e., goodness and virtue. - Hence, an ethical life is a happy life. - An ethical person is happy because he does what is right and good. - What enables him to do what is right and good is virtue which for Socrates is synonymous with knowledge. - Virtue is knowledge and vice versa. - Based on the foregoing, it is submitted that knowledge is the medium of an ethical life. - Expressed differently, rational life implies ethical life or he who is rational enough should also live an ethical life. - Otherwise, if one cannot be rational, one can never be ethical. - **2. Ethical Teaching of Plato** - Plato contends that happiness lies in reason. - In Plato's vein of thought, man actualizes himself if he tries to be rational. - Before we discuss Platonic ethics, we shall first of all investigate his philosophy in general, because we hope that this inquiry can give us a comprehensive view of his ethical teaching. - Plato posits that there are two domains of reality, namely: the Ideal (idea) and Phenomenal (phenomena) worlds. - Idea is described by Plato as eternal, immutable, self-existing, and indestructible. - For Plato, the zenith of Idea is good which he describes as something beyond truth, beyond essence, and therefore, is like the sun that shines all throughout anything in existence. - The phenomenal world, on the other hand, is material, mutable, teleological, and destructible. - Plato's concept of Ideal and Phenomenal worlds can be well related with his concept of man. - According to the philosopher, man is a metaphysical dichotomy between body and soul. - Man is the locus of the Ideal and Phenomenal worlds. - In this argument, Plato maintains that man is a soul using a body. - It is from this thought-construct that Plato draws his idea that man's soul has three parts, namely: spiritual (feeling), appetitive (desire), and rational. - Because man is a soul using a body, each part of the soul has a definite locus in the body. - The spiritual soul is located in the chest, the appetitive soul in the abdomen, and the rational soul in the head. - Precisely, the human body in Platonic philosophy falls under the domain of the Phenomenal world for obvious reasons, i.e., it is material and changeable; it has a definite purpose, or it is teleological, and also destructible. - The human soul, on the contrary, falls under the domain of Idea or the Ideal world. - Of the three parts of the soul, Plato argues that the rational part is the part that can establish balance in a person. - Self-realization, therefore, is attainable by nurturing reason properly. - Eventually, this becomes the "ought" in Platonic ethics. - Plato, in his ethics, speaks of four basic virtues which are: wisdom, courage, temperance, and justice. - Wisdom arises in the rational soul, courage in the spiritual soul, and temperance in the appetitive soul. - Of all these virtues, it is wisdom that rules over other virtues just as the rational soul overrules the other levels of the soul in man. - Because wisdom rules, it directs courage (here, Plato must have been hinting at courage de tete or intellectual courage) and temperance. - For Plato, temperance means moderation. - Now, justice can only come to the fore if there is a balance among wisdom, courage, and temperance. - According to Plato, justice means "the observance of duty and righteousness; it is what is due to or from a person..." - Thus, justice covers the whole field of the conduct of the individual as long as such conduct affects others. - In his ethical teachings, Plato develops the concept that the life of reason (rational soul) is the happiest and the best form of life. - For Plato, knowledge (function of rational soul) makes a well-balanced man, because as we cited earlier, the virtues called wisdom arises in the rational soul. - Reason establishes a balance because it rules passion (spiritual soul) and desires (appetitive soul). - When this happens, there is a harmonious man. - A harmonious man is a morally virtuous man who is rationally, biologically, and emotionally balanced. - If one wants to be happy, one should be a harmonious man: a man of virtue. - Now, let us evaluate Plato's ethics. - Based on our presentation, we can say that Plato develops a universal or absolute ethical theory just like his master, Socrates. - Platonic ethics is an absolute ethical theory because for Plato virtue and knowledge belong to Idea. - He sees virtue as innate and knowledge as absolute, universal, and objective. - In this vein, we can say that for Plato moral laws are universal and absolute because virtue and knowledge are parts of the moral law. - If the good is the summit of Idea and if Idea involves virtues (wisdom, temperance, courage, and justice), knowledge therefore enables a harmonious man to arrive at the Good. - In this case, to arrive at the Good requires one to search for knowledge so that one would be able to establish a well-balanced personality. - Since the Good is the terminal point of a morally virtuous person, Plato says that the Good is: The harmony of our native interest - to see, to know, to cultivate the affections, to associate ourselves with the movements of the visible world, to find our true place in the community of the social group, then join to harmony the grace of symmetry, where variations of temper are subject to rational control, all excess being forbidden; and finally, to see to it that the good embodies the truths that have been won by analysis and experience. - **3. Ethical Teaching of Aristotle** - If Plato, Aristotle's master, claims that ethics or morality is a matter of nature - because virtues for the former are innate - Aristotle claims that ethics is a matter of planning, purpose, and decision: a matter of character. - For Aristotle, it is not natural for man to be moral, but for man to be moral is something demanded by nature. - Are we in the end saying that there is no reciprocal exchange in Plato's and Aristotle's philosophy, in general, and in their ethical teaching in particular? - Yes, this is exactly the case. - But, we can neither say that Plato's ethical teaching is tailor-made or a stereotype simply because he admitted morality as inborn in man, nor can we say that Plato's ethics has a lot of lacunae while Aristotle's ethics is brimming with various ethical dogmas. - The point at issue is that the two great thinkers understand ethics from different points of view. - It is in this effect that we have to treat each of Plato's and Aristotle's ethics separately and if comparison is inevitable, then we have to do so. - Indeed, Plato's and Aristotle's ethical theories stand in contrast to each other. - Aristotle's theory, however, follows the same thread as that of his master (Plato) and his master's master (Socrates). - What makes us claim this is because Socrates,' Plato's, and Aristotle's moral teachings stress the supremacy of man's rational nature and teleological or purposive nature of the universe. - Yes, it is true, Aristotle's ethics also emphasizes virtues, i.e., moral and intellectual, but he gives more weight to contemplation which is for him the activity that enables man to attain the highest form of happiness and the teleology (purpose) for why man acts. - The basic premise where Aristotelian ethical theory begins is the experimental inquiry: "What is the fundamental object of human desire?" - Here, Aristotle pragmatically posits the query: "What is that which man ultimately looks for?" - "Is it honor, wealth, achievement, or sensual pleasure?" - Aristotle's answer is negative; he believes that there is something fundamental behind fame, riches, success, and sensuality. - This fundamental principle for him is happiness. - Because of this conviction, he sets forth to investigate the nature of happiness, its requisites and conditions for its acquisition. - Since Aristotelian ethics is also an ethics of self-actualization, Aristotle cannot help but admit that happiness is dependent on one's self-actualization. - Put differently, morality for Aristotle - which is centered in his happiness doctrine - is exactly not innate but something which has to be developed by man. - Thus, moral ideals are developed. - But, if happiness depends on one's self-actualization how can this actualization be done? - Aristotle's answer requires us to understand happiness in the context of reason, which is, for the pundit, man's distinctive activity or function. - If happiness should be understood in the context of reason, where shall we put the connection between reason and virtue? - For Aristotle, there is a coherent linkage between reason and virtue inasmuch as reason is virtue and virtue is reason. - Virtue, Aristotle maintains, is of two kinds. - They are intellectual and moral. - Intellectual virtue arises out of teaching or intellectual virtue surfaces through one's contemplation of theoretical moral truths and one's discovery of rational principles that ought to control our every action. - On the other hand, moral virtue (which for Aristotle is not natural in us) arises as a result of habit or moral virtue comes to the fore out of one's habitual choice of action in consonance with rational principles. - Says Aristotle: Virtue, then, being of two kinds, intellectual and moral, intellectual virtue, in the main, owes both its birth and its growth to teaching (for which reason it requires experience and time) while moral virtue comes about as a result of habit, which also its name ethike is one that is formed by slight variation from the word ethos (habit). - From this, it is also plain that none of the moral virtues arising in us by nature can form a habit contrary to its nature. - In saying earlier that virtue is reason and reason is virtue, Aristotle, in effect, is telling us that a virtuous person is a person who lives in reason and a person who lives in reason is happy, because he is in active exercise of virtue. - Virtue, for Aristotle, means the excellence of a thing to perform effectively its proper function. - But the question is: "When can virtue occur?" - "When can these moral and intellectual virtues happen?" - For Aristotle, virtue happens in the context of the mean. - Says he: "Virtue, then, is a state of character concerned with choice lying in a mean..." - This means that if virtue is a choice, it is, therefore, an activity in the sense that choice is the original cause of action. - So, whether it is moral or intellectual virtue, it is always a choice: an activity. - In the light of virtue as a choice or an activity, Aristotle puts forward his idea of the mean. - Virtue is a mean between two vices. - The mean lies between vice in the context of excess and vice in the context of defect. - In saying this, Aristotle is also quick to recognize that this "Doctrine of the Mean" cannot be applied to all actions. - He, then, enumerates the actions that are immune from the clutches of the mean due to their being ontologically bad. - These actions are: shamelessness, envy, adultery, and murder. - Inasmuch as virtue is a mean, it thus stands between two vices: one excessive, the other deficient. - This is the reason why virtue cannot be applied to actions that are in themselves evil, because one cannot talk of error and fault in ontologically bad actions. - In the same breath, Aristotle properly applies his Doctrine of the Mean to specific factual cases. - For our own convenience, let us attempt to group Aristotle's concept of the mean and apply it to specific or factual cases. - After having accomplished said task, let us, by austerely following the Aristotelian schematic presentation, indicate what certain cases qualify to each group. - Aristotelian concept of the mean can be conveniently grouped as follows: - 1. The mean from the standpoint of conduct; - 2. The mean from the standpoint of intercourse between words and actions; and - 3. The mean from the standpoint of passions. - The mean from the standpoint of conduct involves the following virtues: - 1.1 Concerning feelings of fear and confidence, Aristotle says courage is mean. - For Aristotle, a fearful man exceeds in fearfulness and the man who exceeds in confidence is rash. - What about the man who exceeds in fear and is deficient of confidence? - To Aristotle, this man is a coward. - So, what lies in excessive and not deficient between fear and confidence is, indeed, courage; - 1.2 Concerning pleasure and pain, temperance is the mean. - What is excessive in pleasure is for Aristotle self-indulgence and insensibility with regard to deficiency in pleasure; - 1.3 Concerning the giving and taking of money, the mean is liberality. - According to Aristotle, prodigality is the excess and meanness is the defect; - 1.4 Concerning honor and dishonor, the mean is proper pride. Empty vanity is the excess while undue humility is the deficiency; and - 1.5 Concerning anger, the mean is good-temper. The excess is irascibility and the deficiency is inirascibility. - The mean from the standpoint of intercourse between words and actions includes the following virtues: - 2.1 Concerning truth, the mean is truthfulness while the exaggeration is boastness and the deficiency is modesty; - 2.2 Concerning the pleasantness in giving of amusement, the mean is ready-willedness while the exaggeration is buffoonery and the deficiency is boorishness; and - 2.3 Concerning friendship, the mean is friendliness while the exaggeration is being obsequious or a flatterer and the deficiency is quarrelsomeness - Lastly, the mean from the standpoint of passions> includes only one virtue: - 3.1 Concerning envy and spite, the mean is righteous indignation. - In Plato's own words: Righteous indignation is a mean between envy and spite; and these states are concerned with the pain and pleasure that are felt at the fortunes of our neighbors; the man who is characterized by righteous indignation is pained at the undeserved good fortune, the envious man, going beyond him, is pained at all good fortune, and the spiteful man falls so short of being pained that he even rejoices. - As a compendium to everything we have said about Aristotelian ethics, we say that one can morally actualize his life through one's indispensable observance of virtue. - If man does this, man achieves authentic existence, because through this man actualizes his distinctive power which is reason. - In effect, we are saying that, in Aristotelian ethics, the end of ethical life is the cultivation of reason. - Thus, in Aristotelian ethics it is clear that the gateway to ethical life is premised on one's rational development. ## A DIAGRAM of Aristotle's insights on virtue, the mean: | **MEAN FROM THE STANDPOINT OF CONDUCT** | **EXCESSIVE** | **MEAN** | **DEFICIENT** | | :-------------------------------------------- | :--------------- | :------- | :-------------- | | FEAR | Fear | Courage | Fear (cowardice, rash) | | CONFIDENCE | Confidence | Courage | Fear (cowardice, rash) | | PLEASURE | Pleasure | Temperance | Pain | | PRODIGALITY | Prodigality | Liberality | Meanness | | HONOR (EMPTY VANITY) | Honor (empty vanity) | Proper Pride | Undue Humility | | IRASCIBILITY | Irascibility | Good-Temper | Irascibility | | **MEAN FROM THE STANDPOINT OF INTERCOURSE BETWEEN WORDS AND ACTION** | **EXCESSIVE** | **MEAN** | **DEFICIENT** | | :--------------------------------------------------------------------- | :--------------- | :------- | :-------------- | | BOASTFULNESS | Boastfulness | Truthfulness | Modest | | BUFFOONERY | Buffoonery | Ready-willedness | Boorishness | | OBSEQUIOUS / FLATTERER | Obsequious/Flatterer | Friendliness | Quarrelsomeness | | **MEAN FROM THE STANDPOINT OF PASSIONS** | **EXCESSIVE** | **MEAN** | **DEFICIENT** | | :------------------------------------------------------- | :--------------- | :------- | :-------------- | | ENVY | Envy | Righteous Indignation | Spite | ## Exercise No. 1 (Score : ____) | **Question** | **Answer** | | :----------- | :--------- | | 1. How did the ancient Greeks live their moral lives? | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 2. How was morality construed during the medieval times? | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 3. How do you differentiate the modern and the contemporary trends of looking at morality? | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 4. How did Socrates understand the good life or moral life? | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 5. Who is the wise man according to Socrates? | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 6. How did Socrates view virtue in relation to knowledge? | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 7. In the concrete human situation, does it follow that when one knows what is right he also does what is right? | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 8. How did Socrates understand evil in relation to morality? | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 9. Present Plato's argument concerning the ideal and the real worlds. | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 10. How is the ideal world related with morality according to Plato? | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 11. How did Plato view justice? | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 12. Who is the just man according to Plato? | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 13. Did Plato believe that man is naturally moral or does he still have to acquire virtues in order for him to be moral? | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 14. By using Plato's view, compare wisdom with courage. | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 15. What is temperance according to Plato? | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 16. Who is the well-balanced man according to Plato? | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 17. How do you compare the ethics of Socrates and the Ethics of Plato? Who is more acceptable to you? | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 18. How do you explain Plato's argument that morality is a matter of character? | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 19. By using either Plato's or Aristotle's arguments how do you explain an ethics which is called an ethics of self-realization? | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 20. What is Aristotle's concept of virtue? | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 21. What is Aristotle's position on the doctrine of the mean in relation to morality? | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 22. How do you explain the mean from the standpoint of conduct? | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 23. How did Aristotle present the mean from the standpoint of intercourse between words and actions? | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 24. How do you explain the mean from the standpoint of passions? | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | | 25. Does this chapter help you understand better morality in relation to your day-to-day life? How? | _**_ _**__ _**_ _**__ _**_ _**_ _**_ _** | ## **B. Christian Ethics** - What distinguishes Christian ethics from other ethics is the belief that the Moral Law is given not by an interpreter but by a LAW-GIVER, Jesus Christ. - To us Christians, Jesus, the Christ (The Anointed One), the Messiah (The Savior) is no mere human being but a God who has Incarnated into the human flesh for Him to carry out and consummate His commitment (His mission), i.e., to save mankind from damnation. - **1. Ethical Teaching of Jesus Christ** - The moral paradigm used by our Lord Jesus is similar to those of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, i.e., a personal call towards self-realization. - It may be argued, however, that His ethics contains different nuances compared to those of the Greek triumvirate since His is so radical, so demanding, yet, so fair, because it is addressed to everyone whether one is a king, a prince, a rich man, a pauper, or a slave. - For Jesus, there is only one Ethics which cuts across race, nationality, talent, ability, educational background, sex, status, and what else we can add. - His moral teaching recognizes no social stratification. - In other words, Jesus' ethics does not discriminate between a slave and a freeman, the rich and the poor, or the powerful and the weak. - Though our Lord Jesus Christ did not write anything, through the Sacred Scriptures we can follow how He teaches His radical (from the word radix meaning root) ethical ideal. - For purposes of clarification, let us classify the Lord's ethical teachings through the following headings: - a. The ethics of Jesus shows more preference to the poor and the oppressed; - b. The ethics of Jesus is an ethics of love; - c. The ethics of Jesus demands honesty and authenticity; - d. The ethics of Jesus is an ethics which teaches faith in the Father; - e. The ethics of Jesus is an ethics that espouses peace and reconciliation; and - f. The ethics of Jesus demands sacrifice and suffering. - The ethics of Jesus, indeed, manifests a preferential option for the poor, the abandoned, the disadvantaged, the unprivileged, the persecuted, the exploited, and the oppressed. - To them, Jesus promises heaven as their reward, i.e., if they have duly reconciled themselves with the Father. - The ethical ideal emphasized by Jesus entices these people to bear their lot and develop a sense of hope for their glorious future. - This is very evident to the indigent, the rejected, the exploited, and the manipulated Filipinos or any human being who believes in Him. - At least, we can say that because of the Filipinos' affinity to Jesus, the Filipinos, in general, try to bear poverty because Jesus says in the Beatitudes: "Blessed are the poor, theirs is the kingdom of God." - For Jesus, the core of ethics lies in man's heart, not in man's observance of the law, or of man's fidelity to traditional norms. - According to Jesus, the moral man is he who loves his neighbors and therefore loves God, for one cannot love God and hate his neighbors (fellowmen) at the same time. - The commandment of Christ requires a Christian to love not only the lovable persons (the rich, famous, powerful, good looking, or generally the dignified or the good ones) but even the unlovables (bad ones) like the corrupt government officials, the prostitutes, the dreaded criminals, and the like. - Of course, this is not easy to follow for an ordinary Christian. - In fact, Nietzsche once said: "There is only one Christian; and He died on the cross." - No wonder we in general have not as yet complied with this brand of ethical teaching, ethics, i.e., to love the unlovables, like loving our enemies, among others. - Jesus' ethics seeks no hypocrisy for it directly points at one's heart and mind. - He teaches honesty and sincerity. - He does not like people who want to be moral because they are seeking for affirmation or approval from the common public or the mainstream society that they are good. - Says Jesus: When you pray, you must not be like the hypocrites, for they like to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners in order to be noticed. - When you pray, go to your own room and close the door and pray to your Father who is unseen, and your Father who sees you in secret will repay you... - When you are going to give alms, for example, do not blow a trumpet before yourself, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and the streets to make people praise them... - But when you give to charity, your left hand must not know what your right hand is doing so that your charity may be in secret, and your Father who sees what is secret will reward you. - The ethics of Jesus teaches faith in the Father. - For Jesus, a believer should not worry for tomorrow, instead, he should develop a complete trust in the Father. - Says the Savior: Which of you with all his worry can add a simple hour to his life? - Why should you worry about clothing? - See how the wild flowers grow. - They do not toil or spin, and yet I tell you, even Solomon in all his splendor, was never dressed like one of them. - But if God so beautifully dresses the wild grass which is alive today and thrown into the furnace tomorrow, will He not much more surely clothe you? - You who have so little faith? - So do not worry and say, "What shall we have to eat?" or "What shall we have to drink?" or "What shall we have to wear?" - For these all the heathen are in pursuit of and your heavenly Father knows well that you need all these. - But you must make His kingdom, and uprightness before you, your greatest care, and you will love all these other things besides. - So, do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will have worries of its own. - Let each day be content with its own ills. - The moral teaching of Jesus demands peace and reconciliation. - In order to emphasize His ethical demand, he compares His ethical system with the Jewish Law. -