MODULE 4

FRAMEWORKS AND
PRINCIPLES BEHIND MORAL
FRAMEWORKS

LESSON 1 – THE MEANING OF ETHICAL FRAMEWORK

An ethical framework is a set of codes that an individual uses to guide his or her behavior. It is just another term
for “moral standards” as discussed in the early part of this text. It is what people use to distinguish right from wrong in the
way they interact with the world. It is used to determine the moral object of an action. An ethical framework guides an
individual I answering these two questions: “What do I ought to do?” and Why do I ought to do so”? So ethical
frameworks serve as guideposts in moral life.

The various dominant mental frames may be classified as follows: 1) virtue or character ethics of Aristotle,
2) natural law or commandment ethics of St. Thomas and others, 3) deontological and duty framework of
Immanuel Kant, 4) utilitarianism, teleological and consequentialist approach and 5) Love and justice framework.

1. ARISTOTLE’S VIRTUE ETHICS

Virtue ethics is an ethical act. It is the action that a virtuous person would do in the same circumstances. Virtue
ethics is person-based rather than action-based. It looks at the virtue or moral character of the person carrying out an
action, rather than at ethical duties and rules or the consequences of particular actions.
Virtue ethics does not only deal with the rightness or wrongness of individual actions. It provides guidance as to
the sort of characteristics and behaviors a good person will seek to achieve. In that way, virtue ethics is concerned with the
whole of a person’s life, rather than particular episodes or actions. A good person is someone who lives virtuously – who
possesses and lives the virtues.
Stated similarly, virtue ethics is “the ethics of behavior” which “focuses on the character of the persons involved
in the decision or action. If the person in question has good character, and genuine motivation and intentions, he or she is
behaving ethically.” The rightness or wrongness of one’s action, or the goodness or badness of one’s personality depends
on his character, motivations and intentions.
Virtue ethics, “is an ethics whose goal is to determine what is essential to being a well-functioning or flourishing
human person. Virtue ethics stresses an ideal for humans or persons. As an ethics of ideals or excellences, it is an
optimistic and positive type of ethics.”

Basic Types of Virtue (Excellence)

Aristotle gave two types of virtue. These are 1) intellectual virtues and 2) moral virtues. Intellectual virtues
refer to excellence of the mind while moral virtues refer to a person’s dispositions to act well. Intellectual virtues include
ability to understand, reason and judge well while moral virtues dispose a person to act well.
In the context of Aristotle, virtue is an attained, actualized or self-realized potential or possibility. It can serve as a
moral framework. When one has the potential or possibility of becoming a musician, he tries to train and study to become
a musician following a musician’s virtue as a framework.
The material world is in state of actualizing, realizing what it is potential for. Everything has its potency for
something, its nature. Nature unfolds naturally, it has no obligation to be so. It has no intellect and will. But a person has
an obligation to be what he/she is meant or on potency to be. It is his/her obligation to develop his/her talent and virtues.
The highest good or end, telos, of a person is the fullness of his/her self-development or actualization. The concomitant
result of this development or actualization of his/her potentials is what Aristotle termed as happiness or the experience of
happiness.
In short, virtue means excellence and virtue ethics is excellence ethics.

1
Virtue as a Mean
For Aristotle, virtue is the Golden Mean between two extremes. The virtue of courage is a mean between two
extremes of deficiency and extreme, namely, cowardice and foolhardiness, respectively. Too little courage is cowardice
and too much courage is foolhardiness (MacKinnon, et al 2015)

2. ST. THOMAS NATURAL LAW ETHICS

Based on the phrase “natural law ethics,” what is ethical is what the natural law says. What is natural law? Natural
law is the “ordinance of Divine Wisdom, which is made known to us by reason and which requires the observance of the
moral order.” It may also be defined to be ”The eternal law as far as it is made known by human reason.” By the eternal
law we mean all that God necessarily decrees from eternity. That part of the eternal law which reason reveals as directive
of human acts, we call the natural law.
Eternal law is what God wills for creation. We are part of God’s creation and so we are part of Gods eternal law.
We may not be able to understand the external law fully given our limitations. However, by reason we have a grasp or a
sense of the external law. This is natural law.
In summary, we have an eternal law, God’s law for the whole creation, which we cannot fully grasp given our
limitation. But with our gift of reason we have a grasp of that eternal law, that is natural law. Divine law is decreed by
God while human law is decreed by man.

Natural Law as a Universal Formula

As an ethical framework, the natural law or maxim may be applied as implicitly illustrated in the following:
A universal formula which contains in brief an expression of the whole natural law is this: “Keep the
moral order.” Or “Observe right order in your actions.” Some writers state it simply as, “Do good and
avoid evil.” Now, the right order of human acts consists evidently on their proper direction to man’s last
end, which is subjectively, his perfect beatitude and, objectively, God Himself. God must direct His free
creatures to their last end, hence He commands them to observe the moral order and forbids them to
depart from it.

So what is natural and ethical for a human person is to “keep the moral order, to “observe right order,” to “do
good and avoid evil” to preserve his/her being. Suicide and murder work against preservation of human life, therefore, are
a violation of the natural law.

St. Thomas Aquinas grounded the directedness of nature in God. All of creation is directed toward their final and
God, God Himself. To direct us of Himself, He gave the divine law. The divine law given to us in the Ten
Commandments of the Old Testament and the new commandment of “love God…” and “love your neighbor…”by Jesus
Christ in the New Testament. And in the we were St. Thomas synthesized faith and reason. He believed that natural law is
part of the divine law, that the “natural law shares in the eternal law.” All of creation is directed

Analogous to logical reasoning, it may be applied as follows: Premise: Stealing is immoral and an evil to
avoided. Second Premise: The act of taking someone’s property without his consent is stealing. Conclusion: Therefore,
the act of taking someone’s property, which I actually intend to do, is immoral and an evil to be avoided, which I should
do avoid.

3. KANT’S DEONTOLOGICAL ETHICS THE DUTY FRAMEWORK

Universal law means a maxim that can be the maxim of all. What is legal must be at the same time moral. An
action is legally right if it is at the same time in accordance with universal law, that is, in accordance with the categorical
imperative.

Kant’s Deontological Ethics

2
 Kant’s Ethics is now referred to as deontological. The term deontological has its root from the Greek “deon”
which means “duty” Hence deontological ethics focuses on “duty”, obligation, and rights” instead of consequences or
ends. An act that proceeds from the will which wills it because it can be the will of all is a right action. Willing and doing
the will of all is a duty, regardless of the consequences.

The Duty Framework

Correspondingly, the duty-based approach can be applied as a framework for ethical decision making:

In the Duty Framework, we focus on the duties and obligations that we have in a given situation, and
consider what ethical obligations we have in a given situation, and consider what ethical obligations we have and
what things we should never do. Ethical conduct is defined by doing one’s duties and doing the right thing, and
the goal is performing the correct action.

This framework has the advantage of creating a system of rules that has consistent expectations of all people; if an
action is ethically correct or a duty is required, it would apply to every person in a given situation. This even-handedness
encourages treating everyone with equal dignity and respect.

Kant’s theory of right

According to Kant, the “universal principle of right” is that “an action is right if it can coexist with everyone’s
freedom in accordance with a universal law, or if on its maxim the freedom of choice of each can coexist with everyone’s
freedom in accordance with a universal law” (6:230). In other words, your exercise freely whatever rights you have on
your property but only in accordance with universal law. Universal law means a maxim that can be the maxim of all. You
can use, dispose, enjoy its fruits, but only in such a ways that you do not violate the rights of others. This exercise of a
right bearing in mind the obligation to respect the right of others is tantamount to good faith or good will.

Legally and Morally Right

It appears that in Kant, what is legal must be at the same time moral. An action is legally right if it is at the same
time in accordance with universal law, that is, in accordance with the categorical imperative. In another context, what is
legal is not necessarily moral. For instance, what is legal is limited to compliance with law, be it laws of a state or
country; but being moral may not be just following the law, but doing more than what the law requires like responding to
the need of another. Paying an employee his minimum wage is legal; but paying more than his minimum wage because of
care and concern of his needs is more than what is legal.

4. UTILITARIANISM: THE CONSEQUENTIALIST ETHICAL FRAMEWORK

Origin and Nature of the Utilitarianist Framework

Two British philosophers, namely, Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, are known to be the original advocates
of utilitarianism, the former being considered the founder. Bentham (1789.)
Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone
to point out what we ought to do. By the principle of utility is meant that principle which approves or disapproves of every
action whatsoever according to the tendency it appears to have to augment or diminish the happiness of the party whose
interest is in question.
In brief, utilitarianism as a moral principle is “the principle of utility or the greatest happiness principle.” It is
also phrased as the principle of “the greatest good of the greatest number.” This is the quality (greatest good) and quantity
(greatest number) criteria.
There are two versions of utilitarianism, namely, act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. “Act utilitarianism:
consider the consequences of some particular act such as keeping or breaking one’s promise.” “Rule utilitarianism:
consider the consequences of some practice or rule behavior for example, the practice of promise-keeping or promise-
breaking.” Whichever, whether act or practice of rule, if they produce good consequences, the act or the practice of the
rule would be right.

3
The Consequentialist Framework
The following describes the application of the consequentialist framework:
In the Consequentialist framework, we focus on the future effects of the possible courses of action, considering
the people who will be directly or indirectly affected. We ask about what outcomes are desirable in a given situation and
consider ethical conduct to be whatever will achieve the best consequences. The person using the Consequences
framework desires to produce the most good.
For Bentham and Mill, avoid pain, pursue pleasure. That is what it means to be ethical. What kind of pleasure is
morally preferred? Mill asserts intellectual pleasure. So it is not physical pleasure as expressed by the song of the
alcoholic “ In heaven, there is no beer; that’s why we drink beer here,” Mill wrote”
It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool
satisfied. And if the fool, or the pig is, of a different opinion, it is because they only know their own side of the question.
The other party to the comparison knows both sides. (Mill, 1907)

5.THE LOVE AND JUSTICE FRAMEWORK

The principle of love

There are three well-known concepts of love originating from the Greeks, namely, agape or charity, erotic or
passionate sexual encounter, and philia, the affection between friends. Love as a moral framework is the agapeic. Agape
is the love principle preached by Jesus Christ. What is Christ did as narrated in the New Testament are all acts of love.
Feeding the hungry, giving drinks to the thirsty, healing the sick, rendering service to those in need. In general, as St.
Thomas defined it, agape is “willing the good of another.” It is the act of sharing, or giving more than what is just because
justice is just the minimum of loves. In the language of contemporary thinkers, this is love as “affirmation of the other’s
being, being-with-others,” “being conscious of the other’s presence.”

Justice and Fairness: Promoting the Common Good as a Moral Framework

A. Social Justice is equal access to wealth, opportunities, and privileges within society. Hence, promotion of social
justice is equivalent to promotion of the common good. It may also be said that promotion of the common good is
promotion of social justice.

B. Distributive Justice is “justice that is concerned with the distribution or allotment of goods, duties, and
privileges in concert with the merits of individuals, and the best interest of society.” The following have features
of distributive justice:

a.) Egalitarianism is the doctrine of political and social equality. “No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or
property without due process of law; nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the law.” This is
not equalization in terms of quantity; it is equalization in terms of entitlement to due process of law and equal
protection of the law.

b.) Taxation is government’s getting a part of what its people earn in order have money to spend for public
services, operating and maintaining public places or properties, for people’s use. It is practically demanding
from taxpayers a minimum of justice, to make the enjoyment of the wealth at least more equitable although
not equalizer. It is a government interference with private property, more or less compelling people to give a
share from the fruits of their labor, a way of compelling diffusion of wealth.

4
 MODULE 5
GLOBALIZATION AND ITS
CRITICAL CHALLENGES

LESSON 1 – GLOBALIZATION AND PLURALISM: NEW CHALLENGES IN ETHICS

Globalization Defined
Globalization means “the erosion of national boundaries and the reduced significance of national governments.”
Suter, K., 2006). It is “moving from a world with borders to a world without.” Nation states will remain in existence but
they have to work together with other centers of power such as 1) transnational corporations, 2) intergovernment
organizations like the United Nations and 3) non-governmental organizations (NGO) such as environment movements.
Jan Scholte (2005), an expert in globalization, gave five different interpretations of globalization, namely; 1)
internationalization, 2) liberalization, 3) universalization, 4) modernization or Westernization and 5) deterritorialization.
Internationalization refers to ‘cross-border’ relations between countries. These relations includes trade, finance,
communication which create international interdependence among nations and peoples. Liberalization focuses on “open,
borderless world economy.” Trade and foreign exchange as well as travel barriers are abolished or reduced, making it
possible to participate in the world as a whole. Universalization refers to the “various ways in which a synthesis of
cultures has taken place, etc. such as having a common calendar, shared common technology. Modernization or
westernization refers to the ways that ‘social structures of modernity’ – capitalism, science, movies, music have spread
throughout the world. Deterritorialization means that in a highly globalized world “social space” is no longer wholly
mapped in terms of territorial places … and borders. Corporations and non-government organizations transcend local
geographic constraints.
In other words, globalization is the worldwide movement toward economic, financial, trade, and communications,
interconnection, interdependence, interaction and integration. It is the integration of national economies through trade,
investment, capital flow, labor migration, and technology, removal of barriers between national economies to encourage
the flow of goods, services, capital and labor.

Moral Challenges of Globalization

Along with globalization comes ethical or moral issues. If the values of people, particularly moral values, are
influenced by culture, then globalization where people are exposed to new ways of doing things further enhances moral
development, particularly global moral consciousness. The challenge lies in the willingness of people used to thinking and
assessing things within their smaller context to adjust to a wider world view; particularly to develop a global
consciousness. For instance, the Filipino “kami” or “tayo“ mentality which implies groupings within the confines of
family, barangay, municipality will become a global “kami” or tayo”.

5
Global Ethics
Global ethics implies growth, from local or national to global moral consciousness, “a perspective that takes all
human beings and their habitats as its subject,”
Globalization includes the observance of global ethics (with an “s”). Global ethics is concerned with the critical
ethical inquiry into the nature and justification of values and norms that are global in kind and into the various issues that
arise such as world poverty and international aid, environmental problems, peace and security, intervention, human rights,
gender equality, child labour, torture, scarce resources, trafficking, migration, climate change, global trade, medical
tourism,
(Source: https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/global-ethics/what-is-global-ethics/
074D65739F9BE0F79ECA1159BE21FEB7

LESSON 2 – MILLENNIALS AND FILLENNIALS: ETHICAL CHALLENGES AND RESPONSES

Values and Characteristics of the Millennial Generation

Who are Millennials? Those who were born from 1981 to 1996. They are also known as Generation Y. They
were preceded by Generation X (1965-1980) and were followed by Generation Z who were born from 1997 to 2012.
(Dimock, M. Defining generations: Where Millennials end and Generation Z begins)

Based on research, Millennials: are confident, assertive, achievement-focused, family-focused and have a better
work/life balance. They have high self-esteem, feel accountable for their actions, enjoy working in teams, tolerant of
diversity, utilize technology a lot, socially responsible.

The common complaints against Millennials from Baby Boomers are: lacking in social skills, overly service-
focused, impatient for change, demanding (look-at-me generation) b: “want-it-all; want-it-now” generation, too confident,
lacking in work ethic, overambitious and lower levels of cognitive reasoning.
Fillennials

Filipino Millennialls in the Philippines are referred to as Fillennials. Fillennials are rising up to the dare. Gae
Martinez shared how Filipino millennials are different. (https://bsiness.inquirer.net/257324/millenials-woking)
“In our studies of the Filipino millennials, although they are generally considered as the type who have a YOLO-
mind-set (You Only Live Once), fillennials livee at the moment and adventurous. We found out that our culture and
values make the, different,” Martinez explained. “Fillennialls,” are very passionate because they want to be better than
their parents. “That is why they try to achieve more, pursue higher studies. They recognize that living the life and being
able to live the life you deserve should enable one to live with its benefits,’ she added.”

Fillennials are described as social-media dependent and also the “selfie-generation”. They are usually spendthrifts
who usually spend for luxury goods and so are also described as “broke.” They are also described as narcissist, the “Me,
Me, Me Generation.” They are fun-loving, self-expressive and liberal. However , they also possess positive traits like
“politically and socially-engaged.”

LESSON 3 – THE RELIGIOUS RESPONSE: THE ROLE OF RELIGION IN ETHICS

Several articles uploaded on the Internet state that ethics or morality is possible without God. Even if one does not
believe in God, he can still be ethical. As to how true these statements are, this is what you should be able to see at the end
of this Lesson.

Ethics and Religion

6
 Ethics is concerned with what is good and moral based on reason. This is what religion is also concerned about,
what is moral based on God’s revelation. So religion is not contrary to ethics. Religion is in support of ethics.
To an Asian author Sim Kwang Yang, the question is, “Is ethics possible without religion?.” If the question is one
on a matter of fact, his answer is a resounding “yes.” According to him, two great philosophers, namely Socrates and
Confucius, “expounded their ethics without recourse to any supernatural being.” Likewise, Yang cites two modern period
philosophers, the utilitarianists Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, who also dealt with their ethical theories without
appealing to the existence of God.
Thus, as a matter of fact, there can be, as there has been such a thing which may be termed as “religion less”
ethics or morality.
However, the same author clarifies that if the question is, “can ethics without religion be justified, ultimately?”
then the answer is no. There is moral restraint among individuals and there is moral restraint among people in society,
because there is in them a voice telling them to behave.
Hence, one should not feel so much sorry for people whom we think live a religion less or atheistic life. The
ultimate assessment of one’s life should be based on what one does, his/her love for his/her fellowman.
Both ethics and religion are concerned with the most fundamental questions of human existence. Religion draws
answers to what is moral and ethical from revelation as written in Scriptures and as “lived by their prophets and Jesus
Christ (for Christian). Ethics gets its answer to what is moral and ethical from reason and experience.
It is not true that ethics is atheistic or opposed to religious belief. The role of religion in ethics is this: religion is
the foundation of ethics, for theists. Religion makes clear and concrete what is ethical through revelation. Theists draw
their ethical views from their religion.

** END OF MODULE **