MORAL STANDARDS VS.

NONMORAL STANDARDS
SUMMARY (PHILO-notes, 2017)

TABLE OF CONTENTS: • “We are always under the obligation to

fulfill our promises”
• MORAL STANDARDS VS. NONMORAL
STANDARDS • “It is always believed that killing
innocent people is absolutely wrong”.
• MORAL EXPERIENCES

• SITUATIONAL
WHAT ARE VALUES?
• MORAL REASONING
• Values are understood as enduring
• MORAL DILEMMA
beliefs or statements about what is good
and desirable or not.

WHAT ARE MORAL STANDARDS? EXAMPLES:

• “Helping the poor is good”

• Norms that individuals or groups have • “Cheating during exams is bad”.

about the kinds of actions believed to be
morally right or wrong, as well as the
values placed on what we believed to be WHAT ARE NON-MORAL STANDARDS?
morally good or morally bad.

• Promote “the good”, that is, the welfare

• Non-moral standards refer to standards
and well-being of humans as well as
by which we judge what is good or bad
animals and the environment.
and right or wrong in a non-moral way.
• Prescribe what humans ought to do in
• Violation of said standards also does not
terms of rights and obligations.
pose any threat to human well-being.
• THE Moral Standard formula (Norms +
Examples:
Values = Moral standards )
• Standards of etiquette by which we
judge manners as good or bad,
WHAT ARE NORMS?
• Standards we call the law by which we
judge something as legal or illegal,

• Norms are understood as general rules • Standards of aesthetics by which we

about our actions or behaviors. judge art as good or rubbish.

Examples:
NOTE: we should not confuse morality with
etiquette, law, aesthetics or even with religion.

Moral Non-moral • Hans-Georg Gadamer, a famous

standards standards German thinker, speaks of experience in
two senses:
are the sum are matters ❖ First sense, experiences
of combined of taste or in plural form.
norms and preference.
values. ❖ Second sense,
experience as singular.
Examples: • which is notably characterized by its
continuity as a process where
“Do not harm “Don’t text experiences are all streamed in.
innocent while
people” driving”
• 1st sense of the word “experience” is
“Don’t steal” “Don’t talk one who is knowledgeable about
while the particulars and has expansive
mouth is knowledge about things;
full”.
• 2nd sense is one who is “taught and
corrected” and humbled by experience
and being aware of one’s own finitude
WHAT ARE MORAL EXPERIENCES? and limitations in the vastness of reality.

• Experience in its broadest sense refers
to anything we undergo, to our
encounters, and to what happens to us.
• In a lifetime, we will have countless
experiences which will shape us and of
course, since there will be more
experiences to come, there is no end to
the shaping of our person.
• Is an experience of moral value such that
one’s moral consciousness comes to work
as one is called “to make a moral
response”
NOTE: A person opens his/herself to the
possibility of knowledge and of such knowledge
to be interrogated by experiences that one
grows in experience, the more one comes face to
face with his ignorance.
• Experience can be considered
hermeneutical An experience is one that
initiates us to a process of meaning-
making.
• Experience takes place when one is
“summoned” by meaning and “when
something speaks to us”.
 • This leads one to examine and put to
test one’s sense of meaning through and
by his/her encounters with things.
• Moral experiences is action-oriented.
In the face of a moral situation, we feel
compelled to respond and to respond
personally and right away.
• We become good not because we
believe in being good or because our
parents are but because we choose what
is good and to be good in thought and in
action. In other words, as one is
summoned to meaning in moral
experience such sense of meaning has to
take shape more concretely in the form
of human action.
WHAT SETS MORAL EXPERIENCE APART FROM
OTHER SPECIES OF EXPERIENCE?
First, our moral experience puts our moral
consciousness to work.
• In a moral experience, one’s sense of
right and wrong or the so-called moral
consciousness comes to play. Whatever
factors or conditioning variables may
have helped develop or shape it, such
moral sense frames our ways of viewing
and responding to moral situations and
eventually, our moral decisions.
Second, moral experience is an experience
of moral value.
• Moral value refers to the quality of
something being good or bad, right or
wrong, and just or unjust.
• measures the human action as human
and through it the person as person.” He
further said that “moral value affects
one at the center of his [or her] being as
a person”.
Third, as mentioned, moral experience which is
an experience of moral value, defines us.
• Either we are drawn towards an action
because of the good that we sense in it
or we sense the good because of our
own value or that “goodness” that is in
us. Whichever is the case, in the process
and as a result, our choice becomes us.
Fourth, moral experience is not a one-time but
is an ongoing, continuous process.
• It can be said that by choosing the good,
we become good. By choosing to tell the
truth, one becomes honest but honesty
exhibited once does not make one
honest for to be such, one has to
consistently choose to be honest.
• It may sound straightforward and
formulaic but actual moral experience
can be far more complex than
hypothetical situations we play in our
heads. Hence, becoming good, as the
word “becoming” itself connotes,
involves a constant struggle.
NOTE: Every experience demands thinking and
decision-making and there can be no universal
formula to solve every moral dilemma. Every
moral situation calls for our rational deliberation
and affirmation of our humanity.
Fifth, moral experience touches on and brings in
one’s moral ideals.
• Examples:
• moral experience about shame or
regret. What makes the experience of
shame or regret truly a moral one is that
it reminds us of how we actually conduct
ourselves in the light of how we should.
 It reminds us that there are certain ways
of thinking, acting or behaving that are
expected of us because we are human
beings, after all.
WHAT ARE MORAL DILEMMAS?
Kohlberg asked a series of questions such as:
1.Should Heinz have stolen the drug?
2. Would it change anything if Heinz did not love
his wife?
3. What if the person dying was a stranger,
would it make any difference?
4. Should the police arrest the chemist for
murder if the woman died?
WHAT IS MORAL REASONING?
• There is no straightforward logical
structure that frames our moral
reasoning for the process hardly follows
a straight path.
• Judging what is good can be a matter of
interpretation for when it comes to the
question of morality, there are neither
facts nor universal-objective moral truth
but just moral interpretations of facts.
• “To interpret something means to
understand the questions to which
interpretations will be the answer.” In
other words, the point of the answer –
its legitimacy – comes from the point of
the question.
• Ethics is not a sociological study which is
only interested in describing social
phenomena. It deals with how should
humans act and not how they actually
act.
• The process of moral reasoning is
governed by norms. Ethics’ proper
object, and decision-making are both
moral act.
• Hence, the point of the question is what
is the proper way of making a moral
decision? Human agents cannot simply
proceed to acting without thinking.
SEVEN-STEP MODEL OF DECISION-MAKING:
1. What are the facts surrounding the
case?
2. What are the ethical issues involved?
3. Consider the principles that have a
bearing on the case.
4. What are the available alternatives?
5. How do the alternatives compare with
the principles?
6. What might be the consequences?
7. Make a decision..
WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF MORAL
REASONING?
• Kohlberg identified three distinct levels
of moral reasoning: pre-conventional,
conventional, and post-conventional.
Each level has two sub-stages.
Level 1 - Pre-conventional morality
• At the pre-conventional level (most
nine-year-olds and younger, some over
nine), we don’t have a personal code of
morality. Instead, our moral code is
shaped by the standards of adults and
 the consequences of following or
breaking their rules.
• Authority is outside the individual and
reasoning is based on the physical
consequences of actions.
• Stage 1. Obedience and Punishment
Orientation. The child/individual is good
in order to avoid being punished. If
punished, they must have done wrong.
• Stage 2. Individualism and Exchange.
Children recognize that there is not just
one right view that is handed down by
the authorities. Different individuals
have different viewpoints.
Level 2 - Conventional morality
• At the conventional level (most
adolescents and adults), begin to
internalize the moral standards of
valued adult role models.
• Authority is internalized but not
questioned, and reasoning is based on
the norms of the group to which the
person belongs.
• Stage 3. Good Interpersonal
Relationships. The child/individual is
good in order to be seen as being a good
person by others.
• Stage 4. Maintaining the Social Order.
WHAT IS A DILEMMA?
The child/individual becomes aware of
the wider rules of society, so judgment.
Level 3 - Post-conventional morality
• Individual judgment is based on self-
chosen principles, and moral reasoning
is based on individual rights and justice.
According to Kohlberg this level of moral
reasoning is as far as most people get.
• Only 10-15% are capable of the kind of
abstract thinking necessary for stage 5
or 6 (post-conventional morality). Most
people take their moral views from
those around them and only a minority
think through ethical principles for
themselves.
• Stage 5. Social Contract and Individual
Rights. The individual becomes aware
that while rules/laws might exist for the
good, there are times when they will
work against the interest of particular
individuals.
• Example: in Heinz’s dilemma, the
protection of life is more important than
breaking the law against stealing.
• Stage 6. Universal Principles. People at
this stage have developed their own set
of moral guidelines which may or may
not fit the law. The principles apply to
everyone. E.g., human rights, justice,
and equality.
The person will be prepared to act to defend
these principles even if it means going
against the rest of society in the process and
having to pay the consequences of
disapproval and or imprisonment.
• is a situation which a difficult choice has
to be made between two or more
alternatives neither of which resolves
the situation in a morally acceptable
manner
WHAT ARE MORAL DILEMMAS?
• Lindsay is a deeply religious person; hence,
she considers killing humans absolutely
wrong. Unfortunately, it is found out that
Lindsay is having an ectopic pregnancy. As is
well known, an ectopic pregnancy is a type
of pregnancy that occurs outside the uterus,
most commonly in the fallopian tubes. In
other words, in ectopic pregnancy, the fetus
does not develop in the uterus. Now, if this
happens, the development of the fetus will
definitely endanger the mother. Thus, if
Lindsay continues with her pregnancy, then
there is a big possibility that she will die.
According to experts, the best way to save
Lindsay’s life is to abort the fetus, which
necessarily implies killing the fetus. If we do
not abort the fetus, then Lindsay, as well as
the fetus, will die.
• According to Karen Allen, there are three
conditions that must be present for
situations to be considered moral dilemmas.
• First, the person or the agent of a moral
action is obliged to make a decision about
which course of action is best.
• Second, there must be different courses of
action to choose from.
• Third, no matter what course of action is
taken, some
• moral principles are always compromised.
• In the above example of a moral dilemma,
Lindsay is faced with two conflicting options,
namely, either she resorts to abortion, which
will save her life but at the same time
jeopardizes her moral integrity or does not
resort to abortion but endangers her life as
well as the fetus. Indeed, Lindsay is faced
with a huge moral dilemma.
• And for this reason, according to Benjiemen
Labastin, in moral dilemmas, the moral
agent “seems fated to commit something
wrong which implies that she is bound to
morally fail because in one way or another
she will fail to do something which she ought
to do. In other words, by choosing one of the
possible moral requirements, the person
also fails on others.”
• When dilemmas involve human actions
which have moral implications, they are
called ethical or moral dilemmas.
• NOTE:
• if a person is in a difficult situation but is not
forced to choose between two or more
options, then that person is not in a
dilemma.
• that person is just experiencing a
problematic or distressful and should look
for alternatives or solutions to address the
problem.
TYPES OF MORAL DILEMMAS:
• Individual,
• Organizational (i.E., Business, medical
and public sector)
• Structural (i.E., Network of institutions
and operative theoretical paradigms,
e.G., Universal health care)
individual dilemma
• When a decision in a situation where
there is moral conflict is the cause either
of your own ; that other person; or a
group of people’s potential harm.
• A personal dilemma is an extremely
difficult situation for someone to
handle.
• A classic example is deciding which
parent to live with.
• Another classic example of a personal
dilemma is someone deciding whether
 to let their family starve or steal bread REFERENCES:
from someone else.
https://philonotes.com/ (PHILO-notes, 2017)

Organizational dilemma

• is when a member or members of the

organization is in a situation where there
is moral conflict, and the decision will
potentially harm either some members
of the group or the entire organization

• Ethical Standards are applicable to all

who are within the organization.

• Ex: Code of Ethics for Professional

Teachers Sec 6, Art. II- A teacher shall
not use his position or facia authority or
influence to coerce any other person to
follow any political course of action

Structural dilemma

• is when a person or group or group of

person who holds high-level positions in
the society faces morally conflicting
situation wherein the entire social
system is affected.

• It is also known as Systemic Dilemma.

• Ex: R.A 6713 “ code of conduct and

ethical standards for public officials and
employees”

• -because this law is applicable to all

public officials and employees in the
Philippines. It includes all members
within the system-it is universal.
Meaning they should live within their
means.