Foundations of Ethical Prepared by: Mr. Jayvee C.

Inquiry Cebu, RPm

 QUESTION:

“WHEN DOES RIGHT BECOMES WRONG

AND WRONG BECOMES RIGHT?”
Ethics Immanuel Kant – “Man is a
rational being.” Every action
From the Greek word of man must be in accordance
“ethicos” which means with laws of reason that makes
Ethos that pertains to man a moral agent. It is the
“custom” or duty of man to live a moral
“character” life.

Ethics is a systematic approach

to understanding, analyzing,
and distinguishing matters of When people are doing
right and wrong, good and ethics, they need to support
bad, and admirable and their beliefs and assertions
deplorable as they relate to with sound reasoning.
the well- being of and
relationships among sentient
beings.
 QUESTION:

WHAT IS NOW THE RELATIONSHIP

BETWEEN “DOING WHAT IS RIGHT” AND
“BEING HAPPY?
Ethics
Relationship of Ethics to Other Sciences
Division of Ethics
1. Ethics and Logic – good living presupposes correct thinking
1. General Ethics- and reasoning. Doing follows thinking.
presents truths about
2. Ethics and Psychology – Psychology investigates how man
human acts, and from
behaves (in general), and Ethics is concerned with the moral
these truths deduce the
obligation of man.
general principles of
morality. 3. Ethics and Sociology – a society cannot exist if the people
do not comply with the ethical standards.
2. Special Ethics-applied
Ethics. It applies the 4. Ethics and Economics – a man’s livelihood must be morally
principles of General acceptable, and he has to observe corporate and business Ethics.
Ethics in different
departments of human 5. Ethics and Education – education liberates men from
activity, individual and ignorance, not only from Ethical standards, but also from laws
social. implemented by the society.
Ethics
Relationship of Ethics to Other Sciences
Division of Ethics

1. General Ethics- 6. Ethics and Law – laws are imposed by the society must be
fair, just, and humane. It must be for the welfare of the people
presents truths about
and shall not be offensive to morality. There are differences on
human acts, and from
what is legal and what is moral.
these truths deduce the
general principles of 7. Ethics and Art – man’s artistic creations must have a noble
morality. purpose, which should not be offensive to morality.

2. Special Ethics-applied 8. Ethics and Political Science – politics is not bad at all.
Ethics. It applies the Politicians should set aside their personal interest, and rather
principles of General promote the welfare of the people in the society.
Ethics in different
departments of human
activity, individual and
social.
 Ethics and Morality

Ethics comes from Greek “ethos” which

means the customs, habits, and mores of people while
morality comes from Latin “mos, moris” which
denotes basically the same; it was introduced by
Cicero as an equivalent to the Greek ethos.

Ethics- philosophical reflection upon these rules and

ways of living together, the customs and habits of
individuals, groups, or mankind as such. This comes
close to the conception of Aristotle.
Morality- refers to the customs, the special do-s and
don't-s that are shared and widely accepted as
standard in a society or community of people —
accepted as a basis of life that doesn't have to be
rationally questioned.
Types of Ethics

Normative Ethics- prescriptive in nature Metaethics- descriptive in nature as it questions the

as it seeks to set norms or standards to meaning of ethical terms and functions of ethical
regulate right and wrong or good and utterances. It questions to understand the nature and
bad. It tells us what we ought to behave. dynamics of ethical principles.

Applied Ethics- the actual application of ethical or

moral theories for the purpose of deciding which are
appropriate in each situation.
Types of Ethics
• FOR INSTANCE: A
Police Officer who
killed a thief in a
supermarket.
Moral and Non- Moral Standards

Moral standards involve the rules

people have about the kinds of actions
they believe are morally right and
wrong, as well as the values they place
on the kinds of objects they believe are
morally good and morally bad.

Non-moral standards refer to rules that are

unrelated to moral or ethical considerations. Either
these standards are not necessarily linked to morality
or by nature lack ethical sense. Basic examples of non-
moral standards include rules of etiquette, fashion
standards, rules in games, and various house rules.
Moral and Non- Moral Standards
 QUESTION:

WHAT IF YOU’LL BE GIVEN AN

ABSOLUTE FREEDOM FOR ONE DAY? WHAT
WILL YOU DO?
Freedom as the Foundation of Morality

Freedom is the power or right to act,

speak or think as one wants without any
hindrances or restraint.

Moral/ Morality- it is concerned with the principles of

right and wrong behavior and the goodness or
badness of human character.

Freedom + Moral/Morality = ???

Freedom as the Foundation of Morality Why Freedom Become the
Foundation of Morality?
Different Types of Freedom

Freedom to be alive, freedom of People have its own freedom

association, freedom of belief, and there are no limits onto it
freedom of speech, freedom to and that is the main reason
express oneself, freedom to press, why freedom is based on the
freedom to choose one’s state in life, moral act just to give limit to
freedom to talking each other, the people. Limit to know what
freedom of religion and freedom the right or wrong decision
from bondage and slavery. would be to be made.
 What is Moral Reasoning?
Moral reasoning as a species of practical reasoning –
that is, as a type of reasoning directed towards
deciding what to do and, when successful, issuing in
an intention.

Moral dilemmas are challenging because there are

often good reasons for and against both choices. For
instance, one could argue that it is okay to kill one
person if it would save five, because more people
would be saved, but killing itself is immoral.
 QUESTION:

WOULD YOU FIGHT FOR LOVE AND

STAY IN A RELATIONSHIP EVEN IF YOUR
RELIGION FORBIDS YOU TO? WHY?
What is Moral
Dilemmas?
What is common to the two well-known cases
is conflict. In each case, an agent regards
herself as having moral reasons to do each of
two actions, but doing both actions is not
possible. Ethicists have called situations like
these moral dilemmas.

The crucial features of a moral dilemma are these: the

agent is required to do each of two (or more) actions;
the agent can do each of the actions; but the agent
cannot do both (and all) of the actions.
Three Conditions of Moral Dilemmas

CHOICE- the agent is obliged to make a

decision/ choice about which course of
action is best

CONFLICT- there are two or more

conflicting options to choose from.

COMPROMISE- some moral principles are

compromised no matter what course of
action is taken.
Common Fallacies in Moral Reasoning

It refers to an error in reasoning common enough to

warrant a fancy name. Knowing how to spot and
identify fallacies is a priceless skill. It can save you
time, money, and personal dignity. There are two
major categories of logical fallacies, which in turn
break down into a wide range of types of fallacies,
each with their own unique ways of trying to trick you
into agreement.
Formal Fallacy- is a breakdown in how you say
something. The ideas are somehow sequenced
incorrectly. Their form is wrong, rendering the
argument as noise and nonsense.
Informal Fallacy- denotes an error in what you are
saying, that is, the content of your argument. The
ideas might be arranged correctly, but something you
said isn’t quite right. The content is wrong or off-
kilter.
Common Fallacies in Moral Reasoning

Fallacies:

1. Appeal to pity (Ad Misericordiam)

A specific appeal to emotion in which

someone tries to win support for an argument or idea
by exploiting his or her opponent’s feelings of pity or
guilt.

Example:
I know we don’t love each other. But if we don’t get
married it will crush my mother. You know she has a
weak heart.
Common Fallacies in Moral Reasoning

Fallacies:

2. Appeal to ignorance (Ad Ignorantiam)

The fallacy that a proposition is true simply
on the basis that it has not been proven false or that it
is false simply because it has not been proven true.

Example:
That face cream can’t be good. Kim Kardashian is
selling it.
Common Fallacies in Moral Reasoning

Fallacies:

3. Appeal to inappropriate authority

An appeal to the testimony of an authority

outside the authority’s field of expertise.

Example:
Richard Dawkins, an evolutionary biologist and
perhaps the foremost expert in the field, says that
evolution is true. Therefore, it's true.
Common Fallacies in Moral Reasoning

Fallacies:

4. Appeal to popular belief (Ad populum)

The fallacy of attempting to win popular

assent to a conclusion by arousing the feeling and
enthusiasm of the multitude.

Example:
Gold is valuable because many people pay for it.
Common Fallacies in Moral Reasoning

Fallacies:

5. False cause (Post hoc)

This is the fallacy of arguing that one event

was caused by another event merely because it
occurred after that event.

Example:
Our soccer team was losing until I bought new shoes.
We have not lost a game since I got my lucky shoes!
Common Fallacies in Moral Reasoning

Fallacies:

6. Hasty generalization

This fallacy is committed when a person

draws a conclusion about a population based on a
sample that is not large enough.

Example:
Three out of four schoolteachers prefer Bright Marks
Markers, but I only asked four teachers’ total.
Common Fallacies in Moral Reasoning

Fallacies:

7. False Dilemma (False alternatives)

Since that event followed this one, that event

must have been caused by this one.

Example:
I thought you cared about other people, but I didn't
see you at the fundraiser for the Harris Family.
Common Fallacies in Moral Reasoning

Fallacies:

8. Begging the question (Petitio principi)

A fallacy in which the premises include the

claim that the conclusion is true or (directly or
indirectly) assume that the conclusion is true.

Examples:
Everyone wants the new iPhone because it is the
hottest new gadget on the market!
Common Fallacies in Moral Reasoning

Fallacies:

9. Slippery slope

A fallacy in which a person asserts that some

event must inevitably follow from another without any
argument of inevitability or the event on question.

Example:
If we allow the principal to change the date of the
homecoming dance, what's next? He's going to want
to cancel the dance altogether!
Common Fallacies in Moral Reasoning

Fallacies:
10. Argumentum ad hominem

This fallacy attempts to link the validity of a

premise to characteristic or belief of the person
advocating the premise.

Example:
A mother says that she does not trust her pediatrician
because she has never been a mother.
Common Fallacies in Moral Reasoning

Fallacies:
11.Argumentum ad baculum

An argument where force, coercion, or the

threat of force, is given as a justification for a
conclusion.

Example:
If you don’t accept that the Sun orbits the Earth,
rather than the other way around, then you’ll be
excommunicated from the Church.
Common Fallacies in Moral Reasoning

Fallacies:
12.Strawman fallacy

Is committed when a person simply ignores a

person’s actual position and substitutes a distorted,
exaggerated, or misrepresented version of that
person.

Examples:
Biology teacher begins teaching evolution by stating
that all things evolve. Student says she just can't
accept that humans came from bugs.
Common Fallacies in Moral Reasoning

Fallacies:
13. Red herring

Is committed when a person introduces

another topic or argument just to escape or distract
from what is being discussed.

Example:
Political candidate lays out his plan for economic
stimulus, and his opponent begins to talk about his tax
records and how he has misled the public.
Seven Steps in Moral Reasoning Model

Emotions are sometimes the reason that blinds us

from deciding and seeing what acts are needed to do
and identifying what is right from wrong. We must do
and follow these steps in order to have a fairly act and
not be bias about anything.

1. Gather facts- in more complex cases,

gathering facts are indispensable before
any ethical analysis and reflection of the
case be conducted. We want to know facts
at hand and facts that are presently not
known but needs to be determined.
 Seven Steps in Moral Reasoning Model

2. Determining the Ethical Issues- the

moral issue should be correctly stated based
on competing interests that practically made
an ethical dilemma. It must be presented in P
vs. Q format to reflect the interest that are
come into collision into specific moral
dilemma. For instance, many ethical
decisions, especially at the end of patient’s
life, can be stated in terms of patient
autonomy (or someone’s right to make
his/her decision about medical care) vs. the
sanctity of life (the duty to preserve life).
Seven Steps in Moral Reasoning Model

3. Identify the Principles that have

Bearing in the Case- in any moral dilemma,
there are moral values and principles that are
vital to the rival positions being taken. It is
important to recognize these principles
because in some cases, to decide whether
some principles are to be weighted more
heavily than others.
Seven Steps in Moral Reasoning Model

4. Listing the Alternatives- it involves

coming out up with different alternative
courses of action as part of the creative
thinking included in resolving moral
dilemma. The more alternatives that are
listed, the better the chance that your list will
include some high-quality ones.
Seven Steps in Moral Reasoning Model

5. Comparing Alternatives with

Principles- it refers to eliminating
alternatives according to the moral principles
that have a bearing for the case. In many
cases, the case will be resolved at this
moment since the principle will remove all
alternatives not relevant to the case except
one. The sole reason for this is not
forthcoming, then the next step in the model
should be considered.
Seven Steps in Moral Reasoning Model

6. Weighing the Consequences- if the

principles do not produce a clear decision,
then consideration of the consequences of
the remaining available alternatives is in
order; both positive and negative
consequences are considered. They should
be informally weighted that positive one will
be beneficial than others while negative one
will be detrimental than others.
Seven Steps in Moral Reasoning Model

7. Making Decision- it must be realized

that one common element of moral dilemma
is that there’s no easy or painless solutions to
them. Normally, the decision that is made is
one that possesses, the least number of
problems or negative consequences, not one
that is devoid of them.
References
Our Happy School:
https://ourhappyschool.com/node/824

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/reasoning-
moral/#DefiMoraReas
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-dilemmas/

Xiansarong Wordpress:
https://xiansarong.wordpress.com/2020/02/19/7-steps-in-
the-moral-reasoning-model/
Thank you, any questions? Prepared by: Mr. Jayvee C.
Cebu, RPm