Introduction to General Ethics

Lj Zaphan Lamboloto
Source: General Ethics: An Introduction, ed. By Jeffry V. Ocay
(Bulacan, Philippines: Subverso Publishing House, 2018.)
 Topic Outline
1. Articulate general concepts in ethical reasoning/thinking
2. Express views and critique social issues through the understanding of
valuable ethical schools of thought.
3. Respond to their own circumstantial involvement with moral dilemmas that
they may sooner or later confront through responsible practice of freedom,
impartial judgment through reason.
• How can we determine the wrongness of a human action?

- If an act does not conform to moral standards.

- If it affects the well-being of the other.
- If one’s practice of freedom violates the other person’s
freedom.
 • How can we determine the rightness of a human action?
- If it conforms to moral standards and ethical principles that
we have learned and acquired along the way implicitly or
explicitly?
- If we experience happiness?
- If the act generates ultimate goodness for the majority?
- If it is pragmatic to the individual?
 • Why do we need to be ethical or moral?
- We are individuals among other individuals.
(Esse est co-esse)
- We as social beings are political beings, hence, involved in the “becoming” of
our world.
- We are, therefore, involved in the development or otherwise, downfall of our
social life.
- Now, in attempting to define or redefine our moral existence, we are
confronting the necessity to examine our own faculties and our moral
judgments.
 What is critical thinking?
What is ethical thinking?
• Critical thinking – the analysis of the situation or the careful
deliberation of circumstances or socio-cultural dynamics.
• Ethical thinking – a type of thinking that does not only deliberate
on concrete social issues, but acts on them. Hence, this is a type of
thinking that also indulges in a battle for a socially just and humane
society
 What is ethics?
• Greek word – ethos or habit
• A branch of philosophy that is concerned with questions of how
persons ought to act
- it is also a search for a definition of a right conduct and the good life.
For the Greeks, the end or telos of human act is the acquisition or the
attainment of the good life through virtue and the pursuit of
happiness. (Nichomachean Ethics)
• For the Hebrews, ethics is the ideals of righteousness
before God and the love of God and neighbors.
- Hence, the end of all human act is to align one’s self
towards the will of God.
 Distinctions between
Ethics and Morality
• Ethics – denotes the theory of right action and the greater good
- undertakes a systematic study of the underlying principles of
morality.
• Morality – indicates the practice, that is, the rightness or wrongness of a
human action
- more prescriptive in nature as it tells us what we ought to do
and not do.
• In fact, as Terrance McConnell wrote, “morality is
characterized as an ‘end-governed rational enterprise’ whose
object is to equip people with a body of norms (rules and
values) that make for peaceful and collectively satisfying
coexistence by facilitating their living together and interacting
in a way that is productive for the realization of the general
benefit.”
• Hence, in such a way, ethics is the science of
morals, while morality is the practice of ethics.
 Types of Ethics
1. Normative ethics - this study is prescriptive in nature
as it seeks to set norms or standards that regulate right
and wrong or good and bad conducts. It also seeks to
develop guidelines or theories that tell us how we
ought to behave accordingly in the society.
2. Metaethics – this study is descriptive as it questions the meanings of
various ethical terms and functions of ethical utterances. This ethical
branch also aims to understand the nature and dynamics of ethical
principles while seeking to find the origins of moral facts.
• (Ex: Why should I be moral? What is good? )
3. Applied Ethics – this branch of ethics attempts to apply
ethical and moral theories on actual instances and specific
branches of study such as in business (Business ethics),
biology and medicine (Bioethics), environmental ethics and
social ethics.
 How does one live a good life?
Are there any standards to follow to
live a good life?
The answer to this is “morality”
Morality – is about rules of conduct with which
individuals seek counsel to live a life of virtue.
Ethics – is about how a person tunes in with
morality.
In this way, morality is concerned with standards
of right and wrong, while ethics is concerned
with how the persons fair with those standards.
 Morality in the Descriptive and
Normative senses
• Morality refers to codes of conduct put forward
by a society or a group, or accepted by an
individual for her own behavior.

• Morality refers to a code of conduct that, given

specified conditions, would be put forward by
all rational persons.
 Implications of Descriptive ethics
1st - If morality is understood in the descriptive
sense, then it follows that there can be no
universal morality as there are various
societies, religions, and groups of people
which, in one way or another, adhere to
specific rule of conduct that govern them.
2nd – it implies that relevant rules of conduct
only apply to individuals within the group and
excludes others who do not belong them.
 Implications of Normative ethics
3rd – it presupposes that there is or there can be
a universal moral principle.
4th – it presupposes a moral agent, one who
possesses certain conditions, such as freedom
and rationality, which makes her choice truly
hers.
• Now, ethics studies and understands morality in
the normative sense.
- this is because:
1. it tries to establish universal moral principle
2. It posits that the person is a moral agent

However, in surveying various moral principles,

we could realize that there is no single moral
principle that overshadows the rest.
• However, we also realize that each theory seeks
to realize that which is good and right for oneself
and for others.
- Hence, moral standards aims to provide
individuals with proper guidance as to why some
actions are morally desirable or prejudicial.
Therefore, each theory boils down to one thing,
that is: a moral standard is one that only tells that
some actions are desirable because they are good
not only for oneself but also for others, but that it
is acceptable by rational actors as well.
• In this way, moral standard seeks to codify
rules of conduct which can be rationally
accepted by relevant individuals.
• The rightness and wrongness of a moral action
is not dictated but justified through reason.
 Moral Standards vs.
Non-moral Standards
• Moral Standards – these standards are the ones that are justified by
reason and not by custom, religion, or by certain convictions of a
group of people.
• Non-moral Standards – refers to rules which do not concern moral
actions or judgments. It tells us what is preferable or not, but it does
not tell us that valuing some goods are necessarily right or wrong.
 Moral Dilemma
• Moral Dilemma – a dilemma is a situation where the individual is
torn between two or more conflicting opinions or two or more
conflicting moral requirements.
• A Moral Dilemma consists of:
• An agent
• An obligation to act on each of the two or more options; yet,
• The agent cannot do both or more options
 Types of Moral Dilemmas
• Epistemic and Ontological Conflict
Epistemic - this refers to situation where the agent does not know what option is morally right
(Ex: movies wherein Federal agents would come for the main character or the criminal while
the family members are clueless of the dangers of telling the truth in respect of “justice” and
lying in the favor of the main character.)
Conflict: Telling the truth vs. well-being of the person
Ontological – here, the moral agent is forced to choose between two or more equally the same
moral requirement and neither of which overrides the other.
• Self-imposed Dilemma
• Here, the agent makes two or more conflicting promises and neither
of which can be disposed without conflicting with the other.
• World-imposed Dilemma
• Here, the agent is unfortunately victimized by a dilemma forcing her
to act on two or more conflicting options. This is often enforced as
coercive dilemma in the guise of choice. (Ex: Sophie’s choice/ Nazi
Germany setting)
• Single-agent and Multipersons Dilemma
• This dilemma involves two or more persons while the
persons are compelled to act on two or more equally
same moral options, but one cannot choose both.
• General and Role-related Obligations
• This dilemma, which is found in many other types of moral
dilemmas, is where the moral agent is torn between the
necessity to act on a particular duty-based decision or
through a natural instinct to preserve one’s own existence.
 1. “What is freedom?”
2. “If there is freedom, to what extent is freedom
possible?
3. “How are we responsible for our actions?”
• “How do we determine the impartiality and reasonableness of our
moral acts?
• “In what way could we find a common ground for our moral
thoughts and reasoning?”
- Kant’s Categorical Imperative - a corrective measure which weighs
and judges one’s actions as morally desirable or deplorable.
- Jurgen Harmas’ discoursive procedure towards communicative
action
- Paulo Freire’s Critical Consciousness
 Synthesis/Conclusion
• The basic requirement for a moral decision/act is, first, through
reason, not immediately through dogmatic procedures that dictates
what is wrong or what is right.
• Second, through impartial weighing-in of moral issues through the
consideration of ethical principles and theories in application to
moral conflicts.
Questions?