GROUP 2: REPORTING

Prepared by:
Kareen Cablinda
Arisa Carandang
Nathan Isidro
Kathrina Valencia

THE PROBLEM OF
ETHICAL RELATIVISM AND
SITUATION ETHICS

ETHICAL RELATIVISM
Ethical relativism claims that when any two
cultures or any people hold different moral
values of an action, both can be right. An
action may be right for one person or
society and the same action taken in the
same way may be wrong for another
reason, and yet, both persons are equally
correct.

Approaches to Moral Differences

There Is No Moral Truth
There Is No Universal Moral Truth
Deep down, We Can Find Basic Moral
Truth

There Is One Universal Moral Truth

a.) There Is No Moral Truth

This philosophical perspective believes that there is
no ultimate right or wrong. This view is called
moral nihilism. Moral Nihilism is akin to moral
skepticism which holds that we cannot know
whether or

not there are moral truths. Moral

subjectivism, on the other hand, holds the moral

views differ from one person to another. This
results to a subjective morality, in which case, what
is good for one person may be bad for another.

b.) There Is No Universal Moral

Truth
Each culture has its own set of rules that are
valid for that culture, and we have no right
to interfere, just as they have no right to
interfere with our rules. This view is known
as ethical relativism. This ethical paradigm
maintains that there are moral truths that
exist but these truths are relative and
dependent on cultures and beliefs of people.

c.) Deep Down, We Can Find Basic

Moral Truths
This

philosophical

perspective

believes that despite differences,

people of different cultures can still
agree

on

certain

moral

basics.

People find some common ground

on basic moral principles. This is
called soft universalism.

d.) There Is One Universal Moral

Truth
This

view

universalism

is

also

or

moral

known

as

absolutism.

hard
This

moral paradigm maintains that there is only

one universal moral code that everybody
must follow. Because this moral code is
universal and objective, moral problems
and moral conflicts can be solved through
proper moral reasoning.

DEONTOLOGICAL VS.
TELEOLOGICAL APPROACHES
TO ETHICAL EVALUATION OF
THE HUMAN CONDUCT

A
C
T
I
O
N

Motives/Intention
s,
End of the Actor
Means/Action in
Itself,
End of the Act
Consequences/Re
sult,
Probable and
Actual

Nonconsequentialist

Consequentialist

Deontological Ethics
Deontological Ethics or nonconsequentialist approach is a
body of ethical theories that
measures and evaluates the
nature of moral act based on the
validity of the motive of an act.

Examples of Deontological Ethics

Kantian Ethics or Kantianism this is also
known
as
the
categorical
imperative
approach, the idea that one should always
base his actions on maxims or rules that are
believed to be universal.
Divine Command Theory - is another example
of non-consequentialist ethics. This ethical
theory holds that the standard of right and
wrong is the will or law of God.
Christian Ethics is an example of an ethical
system that uses the deontological approach

Teleological Ethics
The world teleology came from the
Greek word tele which means far or
remote. Teleological ethics or the
consequentialist theory measures
the morality of an action based on
its consequences and not on the
motive or intention of the actor.

Examples of Teleological Ethics

Hedonism or the view that pleasure (regardless
whether the pleasure is mental or physical, but
mostly sensual) is the only good as an end.
Utilitarianism is another example of a
consequentialist theory. This school of thought
maintains that the greatest good is the
greatest happiness or pleasure of the greatest
number.

Comparison Between Deontological

and Teleological Ethics
Deontological

Teleological

Motives/Principles/Intentio Result/Consequences
ns
Non-consequentialist
Consequentialist
Examples

Examples

Christian Ethics

Utilitarianism

Ethics of Kant

Hedonism

THE MORAL SENSE IN

US

One of the basic questions in ethics is to

determine how people develop their
fundamental concepts of good and evil.

There are three theories

that attempt to explain the
fundamental question of
how people develop their
concept of morality. These
are the theories of the
following: Aquinas,
Kohlberg, and Freud.

1. The Synderesis of Man According to St.

Thomas Aquinas
Thomas Aquinas (1225 1274)
Italian

philosopher, theologian and

priest
Known

as Prince of Scholastics

He

wrote 25 books including

Summa Theologica and Summa
Contra Gentiles.

According

to Aquinas, the moral

sense in man is manifested and
expressed in three different ways:

1.
2.
3.

Man is able to distinguish or to know what

is good and what is bad.
Man is always obligated to do good and
avoid evil.
Man knows that he is accountable for his
actions good or bad.
For Thomas Aquinas and the scholastics,
this synderesis is the starting point of
mans moral reasoning which takes place
when a person reaches the age of reason.
At this point, man acquires the basic moral
principles that teach him the fundamental
difference between right and wrong.

2. Freuds Theory of the Id, Ego, and the

Superego
Sigmund Schlomo Freud (1856
1938)
He is founding father of
Psychoanalysis, which is a
major school of Psychology.
Believes that the human mind
has 3 important components:
preconscious, conscious, and
unconscious.
Know as the most influential
scientist of the 20th century
because of his theory about
sexuality being the center of

Freuds Theory of the Psyche

Superego basically reflects social rules and values of
the society that govern our behavior. Freud equates
superego with conscience.
Ego is also known as the reality-principle. It is part
reason (intellect) but also part willpower. The ego is
pressured by the reality forces of the environment and
the moral dictates of ones upbringing the superego.
Id is the irrational part in us or the unconscious
instincts. Id also known as pleasure-principle in
each of us. When Id wants something, it craves for
instant satisfaction.

3. Kohlbergs Theory of Moral

Development
Lawrence Kohlberg (1927 1987)
Well

known for his Theory of Moral

Development.

He

believed that people progressed in

their moral reasoning through a series of
stages.

He

helped to clarify the general cognitive

developmental approach of Jean Piaget,
through his analysis of the changes in
moral reasoning or extending the
approaches into a series of stages.

Kohlbergs Classification of the

Persons Moral Development
LEVEL
Pre-conventional

Conventional

Post-conventional

STAGE

SOCIAL ORIENTATION

Obedience and Punishment

Individualism,
Instrumentalism, and
Exhange

Good Boy/Girl Image

Law and Order

Social Contract/Rights

Principled Conscience

Transcendental Morality

Pre-conventional this behavior is generally found

in young children and older children.
There are two stages in this level:
1.) Reaction to punishment
2.) The desire for the right behavior that will
satisfy the persons self-interest
Conventional this level is generally found in and
ideal civilized society, hence, the name
conventional.
The first stages of this level:
3.) Stage of Mutual Interpersonal Expectations,
Relationships and Conformity
4.) Stage of Social System and Conscience
Maintenance

Post-Conventional this third level of

moral thinking is one that Koehlberg felt
is not reach by the majority of adults.
The last stages of this level are:
5.) Stage of Prior Rights and Social
Contract or Utility
6.) Stage of Universal Ethical Principles

TWO ETHICAL SYSTEMS

ATHEISTIC
THEISTIC

ETHICS

ETHICS

Atheistic Ethics

Assumes that only matter exists and man is

responsible only to himself since there is no God
who creates and rules the universe. Atheistic
theories propose the following principles:
Matter is the only reality.
Man is matter and does not have spiritual
dimension.
Man is free and must exercise his freedom to
promote the welfare of society.
There is no life after death.
Man is accountable only to the State.

Theistic Ethics

Assumes that God is the Supreme Lawgiver. Everything

must conform to Gods eternal plan of creation. Man is
accountable for his actions and deserves either a
reward or punishment in this life or in the next.
Theistic theories postulate the following truths:

God

is a Supreme Creator and Lawgiver.

Man

is free and must use his freedom to promote his

personal and social interest along with his fellowmen.

Man

has an immoral soul which cannot die.

Man

is accountable for his actions, both good and evil.