LESSON 1

Kinds of Valuation
What Ethics is not...
Aesthetics

Our first point of clarification is to recognize that there are instances when we make value
judgments that are not considered to be part of ethics. For instance, I could say that this new
movie I had just seen was a "good" one because I enjoyed it, or a song I had just heard on the
radio was a "bad" one because it had an unpleasant tone, but these are not part of a discussion
of ethics. I may have an opinion as to what is the "right" dip (sawsawan) for my chicken
barbecue, or I may maintain that it is "wrong" to wear a leather vest over a Barong Tagalog, and
these are not concerns of ethics. These are valuations that fall under the domain of aesthetics.
The word "aesthetics" is derived from the Greek word aisthesis ("sense" or "feeling") and refers
to judgments of personal approval or disapproval that we make about what we see, hear,
smell, or taste. In fact, we often use the word "taste" to refer to the personal aesthetic
preferences that we have on these matters, such as "his taste in music" or "her taste in clothes."

Etiquette
Similarly, we have a sense of approval or disapproval concerning certain actions which
can be considered relatively more trivial in nature. Thus, for instance, I may think that it is
"right" to knock politely on someone's door, while it is "wrong" to barge into one's office.
Perhaps I may approve of a child who knows how to ask for something properly by saying,
"please" and otherwise, disapprove of a woman that I see picking her nose in public. These and
other similar examples belong to the category of etiquette, which is concerned with right and
wrong actions, but those which might be considered not quite grave enough to belong to a
discussion on ethics. To clarify this point, we can differentiate how I may be displeased seeing a
healthy young man refuse to offer his seat on the bus to an elderly lady, but my indignation and
shock would be much greater if I were to see a man deliberately push another one out of a
moving bus. 

Technical Valuation

We can also consider how a notion of right and wrong actions can easily appear in a context
that is not a matter of ethics. This could also be when learning how to bake, for instance. I am
told that the right thing to do would be to mix the dry ingredients first, such as flour or sugar
before bringing in any liquids, like milk or cream; this is the right thing to do in baking, but not
one that belongs to a discussion of ethics. This could also be when learning how to play
basketball. I am instructed that it is against the rules to walk more than two steps without
dribbling the ball; again, obeying this rule to not travel is something that makes sense only in the
context of the game and is not an ethical prohibition. We derive from the Greek word techne the
English word "technique" and "technical" which are often used to refer to a proper way (or right
way) of doing things, but a technical valuation (or right and wrong technique of doing
things)may not necessarily be an ethical one as these examples show.

Wrap-up

Recognizing the characteristic of aesthetic and technical valuation allows us to have a rough
guide as to what belongs to a discussion of ethics. They involve valuations that we make in a
sphere of human actions, characterized by certain gravity and concern the human well-being or
human life itself. Therefore, matters that concern life and death such as war, capital
punishment, or abortion and matters that concern human well-being such as poverty, inequality,
or sexual identity are often included in discussions of ethics. However, this general description
is only a starting point and will require further elaboration.

One complication that can be noted is that the distinction between what belongs to ethics and
what does not is not always so clearly defined. At times, the question of what is grave or trivial is
debatable, and sometimes some of the most heated discussions in ethics could be on the
fundamental question of whether a certain sphere of human activities belongs to this discussion.
Are clothes always just a matter of taste or would provocative clothing call for some kind of
moral judgment? Can we say that a man who verbally abuses his girlfriend is simply showing
bad manners or does this behavior deserve stronger moral condemnation?

Ethics and Morals

Our second point of clarification is on the use of the word "ethics" and "morals." This discussion
of ethics and morals would include cognates such as ethical, unethical, immoral, amoral,
morality, and so on. As we proceed, we should be careful particularly on the use of the word
"not" when applied to the words "moral" or "ethical" as this can be ambiguous. One might say
that cooking is not ethical, that is, the act of cooking does not belong to a discussion of ethics,
on the other hand, one might say that lying is not ethical, but the meaning here is that the act of
lying would be an unethical act.

Let us consider those two words further. The term "moral" may be used to refer to specific
beliefs or attitudes that people have or to describe acts that people perform. Thus, it is
sometimes said that an individual's personal conduct is referred to as his morals, and if he
falls short of behaving properly, this can be described as immoral. However, we also have terms
such as "moral judgment" or "moral reasoning," which suggest a more rational aspect. The term
"ethics" can be spoken of as the discipline of studying and understanding ideal human
behavior and ideal ways of thinking. Thus, ethics is acknowledged as an intellectual
discipline belonging to philosophy. However, acceptable and unacceptable behaviors are also
generally described as ethical and unethical, respectively. In addition, with regard to the
acceptable and unacceptable ways of behaving in a given field, we have the term "professional
ethics" (e.g., legal ethics for the proper comportment of lawyers and other people in the legal
profession; medical ethics for doctors and nurses; and media ethics for writers and reporters).

Therefore, various thinkers and writers posit a distinction between the terms "moral" and
"ethics" and they may have good reasons for doing so, but there is no consensus as to how
to make that distinction. Ordinary conversation presents a much less rigid distinction between
these terms, and in this course, we will lean in that direction as we do not need to occupy
ourselves here with the question of how different thinkers and writers construe that distinction.
So, in this course, we will be using the terms "ethical" and "moral" (likewise, "ethics" and
"morality") interchangeably. 

Descriptive and Normative

Our third point of clarification is to distinguish between a descriptive and a normative study of
ethics.

Descriptive

A descriptive study of ethics reports how people, particularly groups, make their moral
valuations without making any judgment either for or against these valuations. This kind
of study is often the work of the social scientist: either a historian (studying different moral
standards over time) or a sociologist or an anthropologist (studying different moral standards
across cultures).

Normative

A normative study of ethics, as is often done in philosophy or moral theology, engages

the question: What could or should be considered as the right way of acting? In other
words, a normative discussion prescribes what we ought to maintain as our standards or bases
for moral valuation. 

Wrap-up

When engaging in a discussion of ethics, it is always advisable to recognize whether one is

concerned with a descriptive view (e.g., noting how filial piety and obedience are pervasive
characteristics of Chinese culture) or with a normative perspective (e.g., studying how
Confucian ethics enjoins us to obey our parents and to show filial piety).

We need to go further. A philosophical discussion of ethics goes beyond recognizing the

characteristics of some descriptive theory; also, it does not simply accepts as correct any
normative theory. A philosophical discussion of ethics engages in a critical consideration of the
strengths and weaknesses of these theories. This will be our primary concern throughout this
book.

In this course, we will explore a number of different normative moral theories that have been
handed down to us by the history of philosophy. These are various approaches from thinkers
who have presented to us their own unique way of thinking on how to determine the moral
principles that should be maintained. We will first explore Utilitarianism in module 2, which
establishes that the best consequences for everyone concerned might be our measure for
determining what is right. We then turn to a different notion the Natural Law Theory in module 3,
which puts forward the idea that we can base our notion of good and bad on something more
intrinsic than the consequences of our actions--that is our human nature itself. We will then turn
to Deontology in Module 4, which will argue that it is unreliable to base ethics on consequences
or on a supposed intrinsic nature; however, reason is able to determine through its own
exploration of itself what our moral duty is. We then round out our discussion of theories with
one often referred to as Virtue Ethics, in module 5, which requires us to think of our concept of
reason within the larger context of the development of a moral character.

In the final module, we will see how these diverse theories--which at first glance may seem
simply be contradicting each other--can inform our own attempts to think of our own grounds for
determining moral value.
Issue, Decision, Judgment, and Dilemma
Issue

As the final point of clarification, it may be helpful to distinguish a situation that calls for moral
valuation. It can be called a moral issue. For instance imagine a situation wherein a person
cannot afford a certain item, but then the possibility presents itself for her to steal it. This is a
matter of ethics (and not just law) insofar as it involves the question of respect for one's
property. We should add that "issue" is also often used to refer to those particular
situations that are often the source of considerable and inconclusive debate (thus, we
would often hear topics such as capital punishment and euthanasia as moral "issues").

Decision

When one is placed in a situation and confronted by the choice of what act to perform,
she is called to make a moral decision. For instance, I choose not to take something I did not
pay for. 

Judgment

When a person is an observer who makes an assessment on the actions or behavior of

someone, she is making a moral judgment. For instance, a friend of mind chooses to steal
from a store, and I make an assessment that it is wrong.

Dilemma

Finally, going beyond the matter of choosing right over wrong, or good over bad, and
considering instead the more complicated situation wherein one is torn between choosing
one of two goods or choosing between the lesser of two evils: this is referred to as a moral
dilemma. We have a moral dilemma when an individual can choose only one from a number of
possible actions , and there are compelling ethical reasons for the various choices. A mother
may be conflicted between wanting to feed her hungry child, but then recognizing that it would
be wrong for her to steal is an example of a moral dilemma.