CHAPTER VI

FRAMEWORK AND PRINCIPLE

BEHIND OUR MORAL DISPOSITION
Decisions about right and wrong permeate in everyday life, and it can be very
difficult to do. Making ethical decisions requires sensitivity to the ethical implications of
problems and situations. It also requires practice. Understanding the framework for
ethical decision-making is therefore essential. This section addresses the following
questions: what are the overarching frameworks that dictate the way we make our
individual moral decision; and what is my framework in making my decisions.

General Objectives:
1. Discuss the virtue ethics of Aristotle
2. Discern virtue ethics of St. Thomas from Aristotle
3. Discuss the different rights presented by Kant
4. Explain why the only good is good will.
5. Discuss the different points of utilitarianism
6. Explain how justice and fairness promotes common good

Lesson I. Virtue Ethics: Aristotle

Virtue ethics is the general term for theories that put emphasis on the role of
character and virtue in living one’s life rather than in doing ones duty or acting to
bring about the consequences. For virtue ethicists, their moral code would be: “Act as
a virtuous person would act in your situation”.
Most virtue ethics theories take their inspiration from Aristotle who declared that
a virtuous person is someone who has ideal character traits. There is also St. Thomas
Aquinas who asserted that no human act is morally good (or “right”, in the sense of
“not wrong”) unless it is in line with love of self and neighbor (and thus with respect for
the basic aspects of the well-being of each and all human beings) not only:
i. In the motives or intentions with which it is chosen, and
ii. In the appropriateness of the circumstances, but also

1
 iii. In its object (more precisely the object, or closet-in intention of the choosing
person)

WHAT TO EXPECT

1. Explain what is good base on virtue ethics of Aristotle

2. Discuss virtue as a habit
3. Discuss virtue as happiness
4. Differentiate moral virtues and intellectual virtues

Lesson Outline
Aristotle
Aristotle was born in a small colony of Stagira in Greece. That was fifteen years
after the death of Socrates, the teacher of Plato. His father was Nicomachus, who
happened to be the court physician during the reign of King Amyntas. Becauseof this
affiliation, Aristotle became tutor of Alexander the Great, who was the grandson of the
king. When Aristotle’s father died, he left Stagira and went to Athens to join the
Academy, a famous school of Plato, and became student of Plato for twenty years. He
joined the school at the age of seventeen. His known works are related to moral
philosophy are: Nicomachean Ethics (NE), Eudemian Ethics (EE), and the Magna
Moralia. Most of the ideas related to the framework he conceived are taken from his
first two works.

Telos
How often do you as why you always prepare yourself before going to
school? Perhaps your reason is because of hygienic purpose (you take a bath), or to
be presentable (you dress properly) before your classmate and teacher. Or maybe
asking why you need to study all your lessons before entering the class and your
answer is simply to go with the flow of undertakings (reading notes or handouts or
books in advance) to happen inside the classroom. Under the ethical framework of
Aristotle, he means a lot that we need be aware of every action we make. For him,
what we do entails direction.
This direction is what we foresee as the outcome of our act. Conversely, we act
in order to get us to the intended direction. In short, we may not get to our destination
if we do not act. This is what Telos means for Aristotle. All our human

2
action will lead to our desired end. The end of human act is either good or bad. But
for Aristotle, in his Nicomachean Ethics, the end is something that is good.

There are two things about the end as good.

1. Aristotle insists that any good is achievable. Nothing in real life that good end
is non-achievable by human action. From the epistemological point-of-view,
only human beings are capable of seeing the good in all things.
2. Every action that aims in achieving the good is the telos/end of humanactions.
It only means that the result of our ethical decision-making is good. Infact there
are so many seemingly good ends in life, and sometimes we understand we
understand them subjectively and relatively. Simply our understanding of the
good my not necessarily good to others.
Aristotle understands the meaning of good from the perspective of finality and
self-sufficiency. These are the two features that serve criteria of determining the good.
1. The finality of the object of human action has two views – the dominant or
monistic view and the inclusivist’s view.
➢ The Dominant or monistic view
This claims that the aim of every act is good.
➢ Inclusivist’s View
This claim that good, which is the result of the series of human acts.
2. The self-sufficiency of the object of the human action. This means that the
object of the act must be something that will make life worthwhile. One can say
that it is not enough to just fulfill what one intends to do without considering
whether it is worth of doing and acting or not.

Virtue as Habit
Aristotle explicates about the acquisition of character excellence by habituation
(ethismos). Character excellence and habit are the two important terms we need to
consider here. The word character means the development of the personality that
resulted in the application of virtues, while the word habit means that certain human
acts are being carried out frequently. It only means that when a person carries a
certain act only once, it is just a plain act and not a habitual act.
There are two kinds of virtues:
• Moral Virtues
• Intellectual Virtues

3
 Since our concern is more on the moral virtue, the role of intellectual virtue
complements moral virtue. There are two classifications under the intellectual virtue,
the intellectual virtue of wisdom and the intellectual virtue of understanding. The
intellectual virtue of wisdom has the role of governing ethical behavior. In this sense,
this intellectual virtue of wisdom help us what particular virtue, among moral virtues,
we need to apply under specific circumstances.
Moreover, the moral virtues of Aristotle, when put into action, should observe
moderation. This moderation entails that one has to avoid what is excess or defect in
action. Aristotle suggests that the moral virtues are in the middle between too much
and too little. It is also called the Doctrine of the Mean. Here are the excess and
defects of the following virtues (Urmson, 33-34).

EXCESS OR TOO MUCH VIRTUES DEFECT OR TOO LITTLE

Irascibility Even temper Impassivity
Foolhardiness Bravery Cowardice
Shamelessness Modesty Touchiness
Intemperance Temperance Insensibility
Envy Fair-mindedness (nameless)
Gain Justice Disadvantages
Prodigality Liberality Meanness
Boastfulness Truthfulness Mock modesty
Flattery Friendliness Churlishness
Servility Dignity Disdain
Vanity Pride Mean spirit
Ostentation Magnificence Unworldliness

We have to take note that the exercise of the moral virtues differs from one
person to another person. Now, how are we going to achieve the right amount of virtues
as to avoid the excess and defect? Aristotle has the answer: By observation and
correction those excess and defect in our conduct.

Happiness as Virtue
The Telos or end of our human actions which are what we desire and tend for
is good. From the dominant or monistic view, we see some series of actions by its
corresponding results, with the rest are subordinate goods and the last is the dominant
good. This is not all there is since there are also series of dominant goods in the
scheme of human actions. Therefore, for Aristotle, all human acts that we undertake
must have to have the ultimate Telos or end. He is referring to happiness or in Greek
Eudaimonia as the supreme good. What is this happiness by the way?

4
Can we exercise happiness the way we exercise other virtues? Is happiness is one
of the virtues laid down in his doctrine of the mean?

Lesson II. Virtue Ethics: St. Thomas Aquinas

St. Thomas Aquinas was born in Roccascca, Italy during medieval period. He
studied liberal arts at the University of Naples, and in 1249, he became a Dominican
Friar. He is known as the Doctor of the Church because of his immense contribution to
the theology and doctrine of the Catholic Church. His influence on western thought is
considerable, especially on modern philosophy. His most important works are the
”Summa Theologica” where he expounded on the five proofs of the existence of God
and the “Summa Contra Gentiles” or the Book on the truth of the Catholic faith against
the errors of the unbelievers. The two books are combinations of philosophy and
theology where he discussed about the role of natural law, virtues and happinessin
moral philosophy.

WHAT TO EXPECT

1. Discuss the four cardinal virtues of St. Thomas

2. Discuss how is virtue ethics of Aristotle differs from that of St. Thomas
Lesson Outline

Natural Law

St. Thomas Aquinas begins his explanation of virtue ethics by grounding on

natural law. He discusses the natural law along with eternal law. By linking the two
laws he shows that it has theological underpinning because his philosophy is theistic

5
or belief in God as the highest of all beings and the highest of all goods. God expresses
his self through the eternal law, his will and his plan for all his creatures.
Aquinas insists that the natural law expresses moral requirements. It contains
rules, commands, and action guiding requirements. But if we ask where to find it or
discover it, it is not outside of us, that is, located somewhere. The natural law is found
within us, his rational creatures. But there is the condition, that is, only insofar as the
rational creatures share in the divine providence. This implies that we adhere to the
will and plan of God who shares his love and goodness to us, His creatures. In that,
we live up to the expectation of God - to be His moral creature and with obedience to
the law.
The premises is clear that rational creatures, where natural law is present,
insofar as one shares in divine providence, have to exercise their capacity to recognize
that law within them. Conversely, this natural law has to be discovered by any human
beings by what to do and what not to do, and guide their action towards the right
direction. The repercussion is that since only rational creatures can discover and obey
the law, hence, it is only they who can disobey them.

The Natural and Its Tenet

Where is natural law situated in the scheme of things in the Philosophy of

Aquinas? As we all know that his philosophy is grounded on the belief that God exists.
God is known as the highest good and being who establishes eternal law where his
divine plan for his creatures has been inscribed. But he also categorizes the law to
makes his eternal law more comprehensible.
From eternal law is the natural law, which we are talking about. This law is
discoverable by any rational creatures and unknowable for irrational ones. In his
Ethics, Glenn has made distinction of natural law in broad sense and in the narrow
sense for rational and irrational creatures. In the narrow sense, for rational creatures,
it is already given above the natural law is already present in us who are rational
beings. All we have to do is to recognize that we are his creatures and that we are
called to participate in the divine life of the highest being in order to have a fullness of
being. In the language of religious people, this is our divine vocation where we are to
realign our moral life, our thinking, and our being with that of God. This is also known
as participation.
Can we say that this natural moral law is different from the eternal law? It is not
exactly. This natural moral law is an expression of participation in the eternal law. The
word moral is inserted between two words to show that emphasis on moral

6
action – observance to the moral requirements established by God. In moral
philosophy, this natural law is a picture of eternal law as something sensible and
knowable to rational beings. These two laws can never be contradicting from each
other. But this law, because it is discoverable by the use of our reason has to be
enacted to make them feasible to other rational beings. Once it is enacted into written
law, it is now called human positive law. It implies that if we do not enact them to make
it official, it remains within the subclasses of human positive law – the civil law which
is enacted and promulgated by the lawmakers of the land, and the ecclesiastical law,
which is enacted and promulgated by the religious people regarding faiths and morals.

Happiness as Consecutive of Moral and Cardinal Virtues

The moral and cardinal virtues of Aquinas has special meaning in this moral
philosophy. Virtues consist of human actions that are frequently carrying out, so much
so that such human acts become easily executed. There many kinds of acts that can
be carried out frequently but not all them belong to one category called virtues. Virtues
are special kind of human kind of human acts that are moral. It means that such
moral act is carried out in accordance with the dictate of reason.This dictate of
reason is also called conscience, which is the proximate norm of morality. Conscience
is being formed through unceasing education by parents, members of the community,
the church and the society at large. Achieving certain and true conscience takes time.
it is not given automatically from above. That is why we see now the definition of virtues
as moral frequent act. The opposite is the immoral frequent act or vice. This proximate
norm of morality is patterned after the divine reason called eternal law that is
established by God from all eternity.
The four cardinal virtues are: prudence, justice, fortitude, and temperance.

➢ Prudence – what is it role to our moral life? This virtues is an exercise of

understanding that help us know the best means in solving moral problems in
which we encounter in the concrete circumstances. Knowing the best means,
and without acting carelessly without thinking, will incline us to apply them
immediately with certainty. It is like a one-step-backward-and-two-step forward
technique. If we encounter a moral dilemma, we don not rush into conclusion
without considering the pros and cons of our act, and more so what is right and
what is wrong. If we do so, then there is a big possibility of committing an
immoral act than moral one.
➢ Justice. What is its role to our moral life? This habit is an exercise of the will to
give or render the things, be it intellectual or material, to anyone who owns

7
 it. If a thing belongs to you, then everyone should respect it and not own it, or
if it belongs to someone, then we must not treat it as ours.
➢ Fortitude. What is it role to our moral life? This habit is an exercise of courage,
to face any dangers one encounters without fear, especially whenlife is at
stake
➢ Temperance. What is it role to our moral life? This habit is an exercise of
control in the midst of strong attraction to pleasures. The key word here is
moderation. Getting indulged into strong pleasure has undesired
consequences, either excess or disorder. Becoming beautiful or handsome is
not a bad idea, but if one willing to spent thousands of pesos in order to achieve
it is already vanity.
How happiness becomes constitutive of moral and cardinal virtues? If
the telos or end of Aristotle is happiness, which means success or human
flourishing, or Aquinas, it entails the wholeness of human beings that involves
body and soul to be united with the highest good or summum bonum, no
other than God himself is in heaven.

Lesson III. Kant and the Right Theorists

Immanuel Kant – is a German philosopher and one of the famous thinkers

during the modern period. He was born in Konigsberg in 1724. He spent the rest of his
life in Konigsberg from birth to death, and worked in Konigsberg University first as a
lecturer and later as a professor in philosophy from 1755 until his death in 1804. His
works related to moral philosophy are the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals
(1785) and The Critique of Practical Reason (1788).

Now that framework should we use in making an ethical decision? The second
ethical framework you will be introduced is the duty ethics of Immanuel Kant.

8
This framework focuses on the agent with the motivation to do morally good out of
duty.

WHAT TO EXPECT

1. Differentiate legal and moral rights

2. Discuss categorical imperatives

Lesson Outline

Good Will

Are you familiar with the situation of St. Paul In the bible, particularly in his letter
to the Romans 7:15 of the New Testament when he said that I do not understand what
I do, for what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. He has the knowledge of
what are the right things to be done but he ends up doing the wrong ones. He is
confused of himself. St. Paul’s situation is a counter-argument to Socrates’ contention
that if you know what is right, you will do what is right or possessing moral knowledge
will guarantee us with the production of moral acts.
Kant claims that the only good without qualification is the good will. He treats
the good will as the highest good since its end will always be good. It is also a condition
of all other goods. Other matters such as fortune or power or intelligence or other
traditional virtues are not enjoying the state of highest goods since they can be used
by rational beings for bad ends. He even goes further that happiness also corrupts.
How do we possess the good will? In the groundwork of the Metaphysics of Moral,
Kant says that role of reason, particularly in ethics is to produce a will that is good, and
this will becomes good only when it is motivate by duty.
Good will for Kant, is an indispensable condition in order to achieve the
rightness of act. Having the will is not enough but the will must be good in order to
correct the undesirable acts or wrongful acts. But what makes the will good is simply
by virtue of volition. To quote:

“To act morally is to act from no other motive than motive

of doing what is right. This kind of motive has nothing to do with
anything as a subjective as pleasure. T do right out of principle is
to recognize am objective right that poses an obligation on any
rational being (Abbot, 88)

9
 Kant uses analogy to explain further about the good will. When they will do its
role of doing what is moral, the will is like jewel that shines by its own light. Moreover,
Kant emphasize that when a prison acts out of duty, he is obedient to the categorical
imperative, and not the hypothetical imperative.

Categorical Imperative

When a person is acting out of duty, it presumes that the person knows the
categorical imperative. For Kant, moral commands are always categorical and not
hypothetical. In speaking about categorical, it is all about ought, that is to say, one is
ought to do the moral law in the absence of conditions since it is simply done out of
duty. This categorical imperative comes from the nature of the law, a sort of imposing
obligation. There are two formulas of the imperative written by Kant in his twowritings.
In the first formulation of the categorical imperative, it says “act only according to a
maxim by which you can at the same time will that is shall become a universal law.”
And in the second formulation of the categorical imperative, also known as the formula
of humanity, it says “act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether on your
own person or in the person of any other, never simple a means, but always at the
same time as an end.”
From the two formulas are the two principles or determiners of moral
imperatives, the respect for person and the universalizability. The respect for person
is the basic thing about how we treat people we encounter in our daily living. For Kant,
any act that is good happens only when we deal with other people not as merely
means. It is all about dealing people just because we want something from him or her,
and we cannot have the wants without them. This is the first kind determiner of moral
imperative.

The second one is universalizability, that is, an act is capable of becoming a

universal law. An act is considered as morally good if a maxim or law can be made
universal. That maxim or law is made not only for our self but also for others as well
to perform or to prohibit. Sometime when we follow the maxim or law, it becomes either
subjective or personal. In order to avoid this to happen that maxim or law id put to test
by the principle of universalizability. The particular maxim or law becomes morally good
when everyone can fulfill them.
Kant uses the example of lie and promise to illustrate the point of contradiction
under the universalizability. If you make promise to each other to keep the friendship
even after your high school graduation, you are now imposing the duty

10
among yourselves, and at the same time earning the right to that duty. It is a promised
to be fulfilled among friends, and it can be imitate to other circle of friends as well. This
is an act of universalizing.

These two determiners are different in ways of coming up of the same moral
course of action. In universalizing the maxim or law, the respect of person as end
and means, and never solely as means to serve one’s end must be considered at all
time. If the respect of person will be out of reach in every universalizing, then there is
always contradiction. The reason is simply that every person has intrinsic worth or
dignity. This reality cannot just be ignored. In the same manner, whatever that pertains
to the consideration of treating every person as means and an end is always
universalizable.

Procedure for determining whether a propose action violates Categorical Imperatives.

1. Formulate the maxim:

I am to do x in circumstances y in order to bring about z
Example:
I am to lie on a loan application when I am in severe financial
difficulty and there is no other way to obtain funds, in order to ease the
strain on my finances.
2. Generalize the maxim into a law of nature:
Everyone always does x in circumstances y in order to bring about z
Example:
Everyone always lies on a loan application when he is in severe
financial difficulty and there is no other way to obtain funds, in order to
ease the strain on his finances.
3. Figure out the perturbed social world (PSW), that is, what the world would be
like if this law of nature were added to existing aws of nature and things had a
chance to reach equilibrium.
Note: Assume that after the adjustment to equilibrium the new law is
common knowledge – everyone knows that it is true; everyone knows
that everyone knows, etc.
Two questions:
Q1: Could I rationally act on my maxim in the PSW?
This is the “Contradiction in Conception Test”.

11
 Q2: Could I rationally choose the PSW as one in which I would be a member?
This is the “Contradiction in the Will Test”.
The Kantian evaluation rule is this: we must be able to answer yes to both questions
for the maxim to be acceptable. If we get a no answer to either, we must reject the
maxim and try to find another one on which to act.

Different Kinds of Rights: Legal versus Moral Rights

➢ Legal Rights refer to all rights one has by simply being a citizen of a particular
country like the Philippine. If the Philippines is governed by all legalities stated
in 1987 constitution, so all its citizens is governed by the same constitution.
Being a Filipino, one is entitled to all right and privileges accorded by the
constitution. This entitlement is acquired either by birth or by choice. By birth
means that one is born within a certain territory such as the Philippines. By
choice means, every Filipino has the option to stay as citizenof the republic or
denounce it and embrace other citizenship.

➢ Moral Rights are right that belongs to any moral entities such as human beings
and animals. What make them moral entities are the following featuressuch as
freedom, rationality and sentience. First, human beings are the only beings that
enjoy freedom. With freedom, every act they execute accompanies moral
consequences becomes possible. Second, human beings are not the only
beings gifted with rationality. With rationality, everything they do comes with
rational deliberation whether certain course of action would lead to a desired
result without regrets or undesired result with undesired consequences. Lastly,
human beings are not the only beings who are capableof experiencing pleasure
and pain. Of course, humans can determine which action plan would yield more
pleasure than pain and vice versa like utilitarian, and only humans can give
different dimension of meanings to pleasure and pain.

Lesson IV. Utilitarianism

Jeremy Bentham Is known as the founder of utilitarianism. He was born in

1748 in London, to a father who was a prosperous lawyer at that time. He was sent
to school at the age of seven in Westminster School then graduated from The Queen’s

12
College, Oxford at fifteen. He was expected to follow his father’s footstep as a lawyer
but he did not. His famous works related to moral philosophy are: Introduction to the
Principle of Morals and Legislation and A Fragment on Government. What led him to
believe in the theory of utility is after he read the bookof David Hume on the Treatise
of Human Nature.

WHAT TO EXPECT

1. Explain the origin and nature of Utilitarianism

2. Discuss the cost and benefit principle

Lesson Outline

Origins of Nature and Theory

You are familiar with our great national heroes Dr. Jose Rizal and Andres
Bonifacio. We have learnt from our history subjects that they did not die for nothing,
but offered their lives for igniting the spirit of liberty and independence among their
fellow Filipinos.
The theory of utilitarianism, sometimes called Consequentialism, focuses on
the effect of a particular end or telos called happiness. The first who proposed the idea
is David Hume, a philosopher of the modern period, but ones who have made the idea
more depth and made it more profound was Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. It
is enough for us to deal Jeremy Bentham and his classical utilitarianism. He is also
considered as the founder of Utilitarianism.

13
 First is the basis for an act to be treated as morally right or wrong is in its
consequences they produced. It is known as Consequentialism. What is there in the
consequence that makes it morally right? It is only when there is the presence of
happiness.
The second point is what matters in every act that we do would be the
amount of pleasure produced. One must not forget the element of happiness in
assessing the morality of the act. If there is no pleasure yielded, thane the act is morally
wrong. Happiness is comparative, that is, there will be great happiness, greater
happiness, and greatest happiness. Likewise, there are also a great pain, greater pain,
and greatest pain. If there are multiple acts that can produce a variety and different
degrees of happiness, which act is right?

The third point, which is the happiness experienced by every person is counted
the same. It means that every person’s happiness is taken into account and no one is
left behind. How are we going to use such method? Bentham is hedonist and he
understands happiness as a pleasure. This pleasure has a partner, which is pain. He
believes that the world governed by these two principles. It follows that human beings
are inclined more on achieving happiness and as much as possible avoid what is
painful.

Amount of pleasure – amount of pain = moral act or immoral act.

Furthermore, one has to consider in assessing an act the following factors.

1. Happiness/pleasure should be more intense.

2. Happiness/pleasure should last longer.
3. Happiness/pleasure should be more certain to occur.
4. Happiness/pleasure should be happening sooner rather than late.
5. Happiness/pleasure will produce in turn many happiness and few pains.
6. Lastly, in determining the amount of happiness/pleasure, one has to consider
how many people affected. The better position would be when there are more
people affected positively, that is, greatest happiness for the greatest number
of people, and fewer affected negatively.

Business Fascination and with Utilitarianism

In the field of business, there is also ethics. It is just one of the three points of
view used by people when it comes to decision-making related to business in the

14
corporate world. The other two views are the economic and legal. It only shows that I
the corporate world, there is the presence of ethical issues, it is specifically intended
for managers. The outcome of corporate activities will affected the entire stakeholder–
employees and employees, consumers and producers, and members of the public.
One of the ethical theories used by the managers is the utilitarianism by Bentham.

How the utilitarianism being used in the business world? The keyword used by
Bentham is extension. It refers to the extent of pleasure and pain spread to all the
populace. This is being considered and applied in public policy. After crafting the
content of public policy is in turn affect the legislative and judicial process of the
government. The manager or the economist has to consider the amount of utility for
each individual and the amount of utility for a whole society. The same computation
is being used – amount of pleasure minus amount of pain – where of course, the
amount of pleasure should be greater than the amount of pain.
The second problem is that pleasure cannot be measured precisely in terms
of quantity and quality. There is no valid and reliable instrument to measure it. Some
utilitarian manages the problem by making educated guess, plus the past experience.
Other economists, instead of using felicific calculus, use the cost benefit analysis. The
difference between calculus of Bentham and the analysis is that economist would use
monetary units that represents benefits or advantages and drawback or
disadvantages. If the benefit is greater than the amount spent, then it is worth it.
Therefore, it is pleasure.
Cost-benefit amount of money spent versus amount of benefit or drawbacks.
If the benefit is lesser than the amount spent, then it is not worth it. Therefore it is
pain.

The cost-benefit analysis is commonly used only as means for making

decisions such as major investments and on matters of public policy. But it is not limited
to business matters alone. Sometimes it can be applied to matters related to
purchasing things for personal use or family use. But again it just like the felicific
calculus, the cost-benefit analysis has its problem, that is, there are other things that
monetary values cannot be assigned like the life of a human being. Some would say
that the life of a human being is worth more than a house and lot purchased in an
exclusive subdivision, while other economist and businessmen would intentionally
exclude such an example in their decision-making.

15
 Lesson V. JUSTICE AND FAIRNESS PROMOTING THE COMMON GOOD

In the light of free tuition law, the RA 10931, also known as the “Universal
Access to Quality Tertiary Education Act” signed by President Duterte in 2016, all
college students have the privilege to enroll in any states colleges and state
universities without paying the tuition and other fees. Are you in favor that no matter
what the financial status – upper class, middle class, and lower class – of the student
will be given the same privilege?

John Rawls is one of the important political philosophers during the 20 th

century. His main work is A Theory of Justice published in 1971. This work has
addressed some of the social issues especially in the name of the justice between the
state and the citizens and among the citizens. He received his academic training at
Princeton University, and later part of his career he became a philosophy professor at
Harvard University.

Rawl’s proposes justice as fairness as an ethical framework. This framework

focuses on how justice should be distributed that would yield fairness for those who
have more and those who have less. The term fairness were not o equality but as
equity.
There are different definitions of justice just as there are different thinkers in
their respective field of specialization. Plato defines justice as harmony where the three
groups of people in the society working together for their common goal. The justice of
Rawls embraces not only sociological dimension but includes political and socio
economics as well. In fact, for Rawls, he understands justice where there is

16
fairness among members of the society with the goal of promoting their common good.

The two principles are as followed:

1. Each person is to have an equal right to the most extensive scheme of
equal basic liberties compatible with a similar scheme of liberties for
others.
2. Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that they are
both:
(a) Reasonably expected to be to everyone’s advantages
(b) Attached to positions and office open to all.

WHAT TO EXPECT

1. Explain why there is a need for fairness and justice

2. Discuss the different distributive justices

Lesson Outline

The Nature of the Theory

A common view about a just society is that every member treats each other in
a just way. We want to treat others justly and we want to treat us other exactly the
same way too. John Rawls has in mind about an ideal and just society where there is
justice, but in different philosophical nuances. By the way for Rawls, justice is the first
virtue of a social institution, and therefore it is expected that he would always think of
a society exercising justice.
Before he speaks what is a just society, he would first lay the foundation of a
social order. Just like any political philosophers, he would consider order as first thing
first. He would talk about social order where there are rules and sanctions that put
social affairs into place. He would underscore that rules in social order should be
construed as our moral obligation is to obey.
Rawls has his theory’s beginning in the original position. He wants to put things
in place where he creates a favorable condition for justice to exist. It is an imaginary
idea to speak about this position but it is important and the basis of justifying his belief.
The world’s situation is unjust when one thinks or unjust rules. He

17
endorses the anonymity condition and rejects the moral relevance of threat advantage.
The two elements can be summed into what he calls the veil of ignorance. Why
he needs to endorse the anonymity condition it is because we cannot but doubt that
the rules are created with partiality. In this anonymity condition, one knows nothing
about the particular individual each represents, about that citizen’s gender, skin, color,
natural endowments, temperament, interests, tastes, and references.
So if one wants to accept a social order that is just, and then see to it that the
object of agreement is fair, that is, that social order takes into account the interest of
all members of such society equally.

Distributive Justice

There different theories of justices and Rawls speak of justice as distributive.

The meaning of distributive justice is that everyone on the society has to share both
the burden and the benefit of whatever the society offers.

Egalitarian Distributive Justice

As egalitarian, one is concerned with a just distribution in terms of receiving
an equal share.

2 kind of Distributive Justice under Egalitarianism

1. Political Egalitarianism – where legal rights of every citizens observed.
2. Economic Egalitarianism – where the distribution of socioeconomic goods is
quality observed.

Capitalist Distributive Justice

As a capitalist, one is concerned with a just contribution in terms of receiving

one’s share according to how much one contributes to the over-all success of the
goal of the institution where one is employed. The term proportion is useful here. One
receives one’s share according to the proportion of one’s contribution. If one
contributes more, one receives more. If one contributes less, one receives less.

Social Distributive Justice

As a socialist, one is concerned with just a distribution in terms of one’s need.

We have various needs in life, and if we want to achieve those needs, we need to work
hard according to the amount of needs we have. If one has a greater needs,

18
then one expect that his share is greater in the distribution scheme, and vice versa.
This view of distributive justice would seek the level of playing field of every member
of the society where all of them have natural inequalities. These inequalities refer to
those inequalities in our initial endowment in life.

The State and Citizens: Responsibilities to each other: The Principle of Taxation
and Inclusive Growth

We all exist under a particular state in the Philippines, and the state has the
power to collect taxes from its citizens. As citizens, we have the obligation to support
its existence through monetary contribution. It stated in the 1987 constitution, Article
X “LOCAL GOVERNMENT”, Section V that “Each local government unit shall have the
power to create its own source of revenues and levy taxes, fees and charges subject
to such guidelines and limitations as the Congress may provide, consistent with the
basic policy of local autonomy. Such taxes, fees, and charges shall accrue exclusively
to the local government.”
The state possesses inherent powers wherein the government van issue a
command for survival of the people, and at the same time, maintain order and peace
in the land. One the inherent power is the taxation power, and the other powers are
police and eminent domain. The reason why the state possesses such power is to let
the people contribute monetarily in order to support the cost of the government, its
existence, and its other project for the betterment of the whole populace.
The basis of taxation is necessity and reciprocal duties. As to necessity, the
government should collect the amount of its money from the populace for it existence
and its expenses. There can be no government without the monetary aspect for its
operation. As to reciprocal duties, we see how the state and the citizens have
responsibilities towards each other. This responsibility springs from the concept of right
and duties. The range of the definition of the terms rights and the duties is wide, but
let settle their prima facie definitions.

The Benefits-Received Principle

The principle of benefit-received is not without problem. All of us are paying

taxes to the government both direct and indirect, that is, from economic perspective.
For employed citizen a portion of your income is deducted and paid directly to the
Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR), it is called direct tax. When money is collected
form a business entity, it Is call indirect tax.

19
 The point of raising this matter is for us to understand that all of us are paying
taxes to the government. In return we expect better service from them. Now, the
problem of the principle of benefit-receive is this. We have the mentality that when we
pay some amount, we also expect that the benefit we are going to receive must also
be of the same amount.

The Role of Economics and Inclusive Growth

Now, let us get familiarized with basic concept of economics. Economics is

focused on the scarce resource that every member of the society id facing. The role of
the economist is to come up with a plan on how to produce them abundantly so that
can enjoy and benefit from it.
The goal of every economic growth is to increase the production of scarce
resources so that every people’s well-being shall be sustained. This happen only when
the resources are well distributed from the macro-level, which is the (economic growth
from regional, national, and international level), down to micro-level, which is
(economic growth from the personal level that addresses their aspirations,capabilities,
productivities, and opportunities). In short, the economic growth under inclusive growth
must create opportunities for all people in different levels of the societies, and the
resource distributed to them accordingly.

Chapter Summary
• Virtue ethics is the general term for theories that put emphasis on the role of
character and virtue in living one’s life rather than in doing ones duty or acting
to bring about the consequences.
• Aristotle declared that a virtuous person is someone who has ideal character
traits.
• Telos means all our human action will lead to our desired end and for
Aristotle, in his Nicomachean Ethics, the end is something that is good.

20
• The finality of the object of human action has two views – the dominant or
monistic view and the inclusivist’s view.
• Aristotle explicates about the acquisition of character excellence by
habituation (ethismos).
• For Aristotle, all human acts that we undertake must have to have the
ultimate telos or end. He is referring to happiness or in Greek Eudaimonia as
the supreme good.
• St. Thomas Aquinas links the two laws (natural and eternal) he shows that it
has theological underpinning because his philosophy is theistic or belief in
God as the highest of all beings and the highest of all goods.
• The proximate norm of morality is patterned after the divine reason called
eternal law that is established by God from all eternity.
• The four cardinal virtues are: prudence, justice, fortitude, and temperance.
• Kant claims that the only good without qualification is the good will.
• Good will for Kant, is an indispensable condition in order to achieve the
rightness of act.
• For Kant, moral commands are always categorical and not hypothetical.
• In speaking about categorical, it is all about ought, that is to say, one is ought
to do the moral law in the absence of conditions since it is simply done out of
duty.
• The procedure for determining whether a proposed action violates categorical
imperatives are: formulate the maxim; generalize the maxim into a law of
nature, and figure out the Perturbed Social World (PSW)
• For the maxim to be acceptable, the Kantian evaluation rule states that we
must be able to answer yes to both questions: (could I rationally act on my
maxim in the PSW? And could I rationally choose the PSW as one in which I
would be a member?)
• There are two kinds of rights, the legal and moral rights.
• The theory of utilitarianism, sometimes called Consequentialism, focuses on
the effect of a particular end or telos called happiness.
• For utilitarianism the basis for an act to be treated as morally right or wrong is
in its consequences they produced.
• The second point is what matters in every act that we do would be the
amount of pleasure produced.
• The third point, which is the happiness experienced by every person is
counted the same.

21
• Cost-benefit amount of money spent versus amount of benefit or drawbacks.
If the benefit is lesser than the amount spent, then it is not worth it. Therefore
it is pain it is commonly used only as means for making decisions such as major
investments and on matters of public policy.
• If one wants to accept a social order that is just, and then see to it that the
object of agreement is fair, that is, that social order takes into account the
interest of all members of such society equally.

22
23
24
25
26