MODULE IV - FRAMEWORKS AND PRINCIPLES BEHIND OUR MORAL

DISPOSITION

INTRODUCTION

This module discusses five lessons: First, the basic theories as frameworks in ethics,
followed by virtue Ethics, third is Kants and Rights theory, followed by utilitarianism and lastly
justice and fairness.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

After studying the module, the students must be able to:

1. Explain the role of mental frames in moral experiences.

2. Articulate what virtue ethics is and make use of it.
3. Discuss the right theory.
4. Differentiate a legal from moral right
5. Articulate utilitarianism, justice and fairness.
6. Practice justice and fairness in their life.

DIRECTIONS/ MODLE ORGA

Read the learning outcomes carefully and be able to achieve them. Know by heart the
frameworks and principles behind our moral disposition. Answer the learning experiences after
each lesson.

GOOD LUCK!!!

1
Lesson 1 - Basic Theories as Frameworks in Ethics

Framework is a basic structure underlying a system or concept. In Ethics, it refers to a set

of assumptions, concepts, values and practices that constitutes a way of viewing reality. A
framework is pretty much like worldview or a held theory.

Framework and principles in Ethics dictate one's moral disposition or the way a person
resolves moral dilemma. Hence it is needed to learn that basic moral theories espoused by many
people. An overview of the fundamental moral principles, concepts and theories are provided.

Modern Ethicists generally divide the study of morality into three general subject areas:
1) meta-ethics, 2) normative ethics, and 2) applied ethics, under these respective areas are
various moral theories or framework.

A. Meta- Ethics

Meta-Ethics is the branch of ethics that studies the nature of morality, as such, it talks
about the meaning, reference and truth values of moral judgements. It also explains what
goodness and wickedness mean and we know about them. Studying the methods for
choosing ethical principles and doing normative ethics is part of the meta-ethics.

Because it studies the meaning of ethical languages and metaphysics of moral truths,
meta-ethics deals with questions like the following:

Are there objectives like moral truths? What do the words 'good', 'bad', 'right', and 'wrong'
mean? Are moral judgements a matter of subjective personal feeling? If we say slavery is
wrong are we just making a claim about our customs or are we making an objective
declaration that is true regardless of what anybody may think? How can we know if
something is right or wrong? How may ethical prepositions be supported or defended?

1. Cognitivism vs. Non-Cognitivism

Cognitivism states that moral judgements convey prepositions, that are truth bearers or
they are either true or false. Most ethical theories are cognitivists as they contend that
right and wrong are matters of fact. The two forms of cognitive ethics are the moral
realism and the ethical subjectivism.

2
 a. Moral realism claims that the existence of moral facts and the truth of moral
judgments are independent or free from people’s thoughts and perfections. It maintains
that morality is about objective facts. ( for further discussions please read the appendix B.
Moral Realism and Objectism of module)

b. Ethical subjectism. Ethical subjectism holds that the truth of ethical proposition is
dependent on the attitudes or standard of a person or group of persons. It is contrary to
moral realism.

2. Non-cognitivism denies that moral judgments are either true or false. It claims that
ethical sentences do not convey authentic propositions.

a. Emotivism – The most popular form of non-cognitivism theory. It holds that moral
judgments are mere expressions of our emotion and feelings.

2. Universalism vs Relativism

a. Moral universalism theorizes that moral facts and principles apply to everybody in all
places. It is called “moral objectivism” . It claims that a universal ethics exist and
applies in all similarly situated persons regardless of nationality, citizenship, race,
culture, religion, signal preference or any differentiating factor. Moral universalism is
very much compatible with moral realism.

b. Moral relativism. It holds that different moral facts and principles apply to different
persons or group of individuals Denying a single , objective standard for morality, it
holds that all morals are mere preferences. It is compatible with moral subjectivism.

3. Empericism vs Rationalism vs Intuitionism

a. Moral Empiricism is a meta-ethical stance which states that moral facts are known
through experience and observation. The theory is an extension of “empiricism “ in
epistemology which states that all knowledge of matters of fact is derived from
experience and our mind is not equipped with pre- experience concepts.

b. Moral rationalism contends that moral facts and principles are knowable a priori, that
is by reason alone and without reference to experience. As rationalism in epistemology
claims that knowledge about reality are gained through non-empirical deductive system.
In general the theory relies on reason rather intuition in justifying a belief or action.

c. Moral Instuitionism. This holds that moral truths are knowable by intuition that is by
immediate instinctive knowledge without reference to any evidence. The moral value of

3
 actions may be known intuitively, even if their consequences have not been uncovered. In
general it claims that some moral facts can be known without inference. Non-inferential
moral knowledge may be compatible with moral intuition.

B. Normative Ethics.

It is the branch of Ethics that studies how man ought to act, morally speaking. It
examines ethical norms, that is those guidelines about what is right, worthwhile, virtuous
or just.

Normative Ethics evaluates standards for the rightness and wrongness of actions and
determines the moral course of actions. Prescriptive in nature, it addresses specific moral
questions about what we should do or believe. We do normative ethics if we justify
norms like “Discrimination is wrong”, or we must always act in accordance with our
duty.” for distinction, meta-ethics teaches questions such as “What is goodness?’
“Normative ethics deals with like “What ought one to do?”

Normative ethical theories are categorized into three kinds: deontological, teleological
and virtue ethics.

a. Deontology- It is an Ethical system that bases morality on independent moral rules or

duties. The term deontology came from the word deon, which means “duty” implying the
foundational nature of man’s duties or obligations. Behaving morally means adherence to
duties or moral rules, and failure to obey them is immoral. This is called non
consequential-ism. The principles are obligatory regardless of the consequence that
action might produce.

b. Teleology - This refers to moral system that determines moral value of actions by their
outcomes. From the Greek word “telos” which means “end” teleology takes into account
the end result of the actions as the exclusive consideration of its morality. The famous
form of teleology is consequentialism which proposes that morality is determined solely
by a cost-benefit evaluation of the action’s consequences.

c. Virtue Ethics -It is a moral system that places emphasis on developing good habits of
character, like kindness and generosity and avoiding bad character traits or vices such as
greed or hatred. This gives importance to moral education which molds individuals to
habitually act in a virtuous manner. Virtue ethics describes right actions are performed by
virtuous persons.

C. Applied Ethics

Applied Ethics philosophically examines specific controversial moral issues. An applied

ethics issue must be a matter of moral judgment and has to be controversial. That is ,
there must be a group of people both for and against the issue.

4
 Subfields & Applied Ethical Issues

a. Bioethics - it is concerned with issues pertaining to life, biomedical

researches medicines , health care and medical profession. It deals with
controversial issues like surrogate mothering, genetic manipulation of fetuses,
stem cell research, using human embryos in research, in-vitro fertilization,
abortion, euthanasia, suicide, patient’s rights, confidentiality of patient’s records
and mandatory medical screening.

b. Environmental Ethics - It deals with moral issues concerning nature ,

ecosystem, and its species preservation, pollution control end sustainable
development.

c. Business Ethics. It examines principles concerning business

environmental which involves issues about corporate practices, policies, business
behavior, and its conducts and relationships of individuals in the organizations. It
investigates issues like employee rights harassments. Labor unions, job
discrimination and whistle blowing.

d. Sexual Ethics- It studies moral issues about sexuality and human sexual
behavior. It examines topics like homosexuality, lesbianism, polygamy, pre-
marital sex, marital fidelity, extra-marital sex, non-marital procreation, loveless
sexual relations, safe sex, and contraceptive use.

e. Social Ethics. It deals with what is right for society. Some issues under
this are discrimination, death penalty, nuclear weapon production gun control,
drug use for fun, and welfare rights.

Learning Experiences:

A. Identification: Identify the term referred to:

1. It is a moral system that places emphasis on developing good habits of character.

2. A branch in ethics that studies the nature of morality.

3. It states that moral facts and principles apply to everybody in all places.

4. It contends that morality is by reason alone and without references to experience.

5. The moral system that determines the moral value of actions by their outcomes or
results.

5
 6. It holds that the truth of ethical proposition is dependent on the attitudes or standards
of a person.

7. It concerns ethical issues pertaining to life , health care and medical professions.

8. It takes into account the end result of the action as the exclusive consideration of its
morality.

9. It states that all knowledge of matters of fact is derived from experience.

10. It is a meta-ethical stance which states that moral facts are known through
observation and experience.

B. Essay:

1. Classify the dominant mental frames. What are the main classification of ethical theories?
Discuss each category.

2. Why is applied ethics important?

6
Lesson II. Virtue Ethics

The contemporary theory in Ethics called Virtue Ethics started with the three great Greek
philosophers. Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. These Greek philosophers in the ancient period
deeply affected Western Philosophy.

Though having political ambition as a young man, Plato eventually became a student and
disciple of Socrates, the most admired and patronized Greek Philosophers at that time, Aristotle
is a philosopher and natural scientist who eventually shared the distinction of being the most
famous of ancient philosophers with Socrates and Plato, his teacher.

The Italian philosopher and theologian. Thomas Aquinos revived, enhanced and “
Christianized” The Greek Virtue Ethics.

A. Virtue Ethics Defined - According to this theory a virtuous person is someone who
acts virtuously and people act virtuously if they possess and live the virtues. A virtue is a
moral characteristic that an individual needs to live well Virtue ethicists hold that people
live trying to develop their faculties to the fullest. Our faculties to develop are physical
intellectual, social, emotional moral or spiritual. Ethical excellence is developing one’s
moral capacity to the fullest which is displayed by the virtues.

Basically, virtues are freely chosen character traits that people praise in others, because
1) they are difficult to develop 2) they are corrective of natural deficiencies (for example
industriousness is corrective of one’s tendency to be lazy, and (3) They are beneficial to
both self and society. Virtue ethics defines a moral person as someone who develops the
virtues and unfailingly displays them overtime. The ancient Greeks have four cardinal
virtues namely; wisdom, courages, moderation and justices. For Christians they have
faith, hope, charity and love. Others have virtues associated with humanity namely,
grace, mercy, forgiveness, honor, reasonableness and solidarity.

B. Socrates and Plato’s Moral Philosophy - Socrates holds that pleasures and pain fail
to provide an objective standard for determining moral from immoral since they do not
exist apart from one another, while good and evil do. He believes in the existence of
objective ethical standards though it is not easy to specify them.

Central to Plato’s philosophy is the theory of forms. Circularity and squareness are good
examples of forms. A thing in the physical world may be called a circle or a square,
insofar as it resembles or participates the form “circularity” or “squareness”.

Since everything in the perceptible realm participates in independent and perfect forms,
there is also a form even for moral predicates, such as justice and happiness. The highest
of all forms is the form of the Good. For Plato those who understand the Good will
always do good actions. Bad actions are done out of not knowing the [Link] know the

7
Good requires an austere and intellectually meticulous way of life. Virtue therefore is
knowledge and can be taught. Knowledge of the Good is the source of guidance in moral
decisions making that to know the good, is to do good.

C. Aristotle’s Ethics - The Nicomachean Ethics has been regarded as the Ethics of
Aristotle since the beginning of the Christian era. There are three general descriptions
which are interrelated to depict Aristotle’s ethics.

a. Aristotle’s Telos. A telos is an end or purpose. His ethical system may be

termed “self-realization” that is when someone acts in line with his nature or end
and thus realizes his full potential, he does moral and will be happy. Aristotle
believes that the essence of beings lay not at their end(telos). The essence or telos
of human being is rationality thus a life of contemplation is the best kind of life
for true human flourishing.

Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics holds that all humans seek happiness (well being)
but in different ways. True happiness is tied to the purpose or end of human life.
The essence of human beings is Reason. Reason employed in achieving
happiness leads to moral virtues.(e.g. courage, temporarily justice and
prudence) and intellectual virtues(e.g. science , art, practical wisdom and
theoretical wisdom). Virtuous actions stem from virtuous persons. Virtuous
actions are there chosen, by person with wisdom because what is good is
obvious to such a person.

b .Happiness and Virtues Aristotle believes that the ultimate human goal is self-
realization. This entails achieving one’s purpose by living consistently with
human nature. Accomplishing it produces happiness.

Aristotle identifies three nature of man. The vegetable or physical , animal or

emotional and rational or mental. What distinguishes man from other creatures in
his rational nature or the ability to reason. This is the most important as it is
uniquely human. Living in accordance with reason is very vital in self realization
or developing one’s potential. Self-realization is the awareness of our nature and
the development of our potentials. It is the key to human happiness.

Aristotle also considers happiness as the summum bonum. The greatest good of
all human life. This is the only intrinsic good, that is, the good pursued for its own
sake.

Happiness is man’s ultimate goal as it is an end in itself. Agreeing with Plato

Aristotle believes that there is an essential connection between living happily and

8
living virtuously. In fact, Aristotle connects happiness to virtuous. To him, human
good is the activity of the soul in accordance with excellence or virtue.

c. Virtue as habit- Aristotle’s idea of happiness should also be understood in the

sense of human flourishing. This flourishing is attained by habitual practice
of moral and intellectual excellence or virtues. Acting in line with virtues is
acting with reason.

Aristotle uses the word “hexis” to refer to moral virtue. Hexis is also an active
state, a condition in which something must actively hold itself. Virtue
manifested in action.

For Aristotle, moral virtue is the only practical road to effective action. A virtuous
person who has good character sees truly , judges rightly and acts morally.

d. Virtues and the Golden Mean. Virtue refers to an excellence of moral or

intellectual character. Aristotle distinguishes two kinds of values; intellectual and
moral values. Intellectual virtues are the fully rational part of the soul and the
moral virtues refer to the part of the rational soul which can obey reason. Moral
virtue is an expression of character.

Moral virtues enable us to act according to reason which means acting in a

reasonable manner is done when we choose and indeed act in a way that neither
goes to excess nor defect. Excess and defect indicate a vice.

Vice lies neither in the vice deficiency nor the vice of excess, but in the middle
ground. Thus, moral virtue is the golden mean between the two or less desirable
extremes. The virtuous person is brought up to find enjoyment in virtuous action
and sorrow in vices.

Aristotle four basic moral virtues: courage, temperance, justice and prudence.
Courage is the golden mean between cowardice(deficiency) and tactless
rashness(excess). The coward has too little bravery, the reckless individual has
too much, and the courageous shows just proper amount of bravery.
Temperance is the mean between gluttony(excess) and extreme frugality
(deficiency). Both over indulgence and denying oneself of bodily pleasures
makes one less happy whereas practicing temperance makes one virtuous and
fulfilled. This shows the connection between being happy and being virtuous.

Justice is the virtue of giving others right what they deserve, neither more nor
less. What is just or reasonable enables us to keep away from excess and defect
called prudence or wisdom.

9
 e. Phronesis and Practice - In using the golden means, to become virtuous, we
must recognize not only that the mean is neither too much nor too little but also
it is relative to moral agents. An example is that the right amount for food for a
6-footer basketball player differs from the amount of food for a 3-footer, thin
12- year old boy. To avoid excess and defect we have to find out the right
amount in our respective unique case and situation. The phronesis the
intellectual virtue of practical wisdom is that kind of moral knowledge which
guides us to what is appropriate in conjunction with moral virtue, Aristotle
believes that a morally virtuous man is someone who is constantly and
habitually acts according to moral virtue and practical wisdom on phronesis
forming an ethical character, achieving self-realization thus realizing
happiness and human good.

D. Evaluation of Greek Philosophers Ethical Theories - Socrates and Plato based on

their ethical theory advocate a positive view of man. Their philosophy implies that human
beings who behave immorally do so out of ignorance of the Good. All vice therefore si
the result of lack of knowledge and that no person is willingly bad. Concerning this, we
can comment that punishing bad deeds has no place in this theory, since bad actions are
not blameworthy. A just person has a proper balance among the rational, spirited,
appetitive aspects of the soul. With such well-ordered soul the just person is truly the
happy one, far happier than the wicked, whatever material advantages, the unjust person
enjoys, and no matter what difficulties or poor status the moral person suffers. The beauty
of this ethical theory is that it inspires people to be moral because morality is a recipe to
real happiness.

The non-figurative theory of Plato serves as one of the pioneers in advocating the
widely accepted moral realism or objectivism in meta-ethics. It teachers that there are
moral truths that are independent of people's thoughts and perceptions or society's beliefs
and customs. Aristotle's concept of virtue is more active than Plato's. Whereas Plato
equates with mere knowledge of the Form of the Good, Aristotle considers virtue not
innate or something taught but virtue is acquired by practice and lost disuse.

Aristotle's ethics is better for it distinguishes doing right from knowing what is
right. Moral actions are consequences of having our moral character properly developed,
not of mere grasping the Good. It encourages constantly performing moral actions
because morality is a life-time project. By teaching to avoid both excessive and the
deficient Aristotle's moral view is more practical, particular and applicable. In a particular
social setting, It identifies the mean which should be adopted, and the extremes which

10
should be avoided. In social relations, it promotes being friendly, but not flattering and
rude. In ending money, one must be thrifty but not prodigal and tight. Aristotle's
explains better accountability and responsibility, he doesn't hold Socrates view of bad
deeds as more ignorance of the Good. Instead, he believes that when we do something
wrong, this involves a temporary suspension of knowledge. We are held responsible for
our actions. Mistakes are anticipated in Aristotle's view and acknowledge as learning
opportunities.
On the negative side, Aristotle's, doctrine of practical wisdom in determining
what is good for someone in a particular instance opens the door to bias. prejudice and
subjectivism. Giving room to individual judgement the doctrine could be used to justify
one's very decision, regardless of its effects to other people and society. Another is
applicability of moderation. In some instances, the right thing is to do the extreme thing.
Moderate actions are not always the best ones in time of wars, crises, tragedies and other
emergencies. Obviously some virtuous should not be expressed in moderation. No one
could consent that his/her spouse would love him/her moderately. Also should one be
grateful, truthful, generous only moderately? Besides there is no universal agreement on
what is moderate.

Finally, Aristotle's prescription on being moral, as it is ideal and theoretical, can

be regardless as complex and tough. Being virtuous for him demotes doing what is right,
to the right person, at the right moment, in the appropriate amount, in the correct manner
for the right reason.

E. Tomas Aquina's Ethics

The Angelic Doctor and the Prince of Scholarties, Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274)
is an Italian Philosopher and Theologian who ranks among the most important thinkers of
the medieval period. Like the Greek Philosophers, Aquinas believes that all actions are
directed towards ends and happiness is the final end. Aquinas believes that happiness
consists in activities in accordance with virtue. Like Augustine Aquinas holds that
ultimate happiness is not attainable in this life, is to be found in the souls of the blessed in
the heaven or in beatitude with God.

1. The Natural Law - Central in Aquinas Ethics is his typology of laws. By the
term "law", he means an ordinance of reason for the common good promulgated
by someone who cares for the community.

11
 The four primary types of laws according to Aquinas are:

a) Eternal Law - This refers to the rational plan of God by which all
creation is ordered. As God is the supreme ruler of everything, the
rational pattern or form of the universe in his mind is the law that
directs everything in the universe to its appointed end. According
to this law, everything in the universe is his subject.

b) Natural Law - This is an aspect of the eternal law which is

accessible to human reason. This law compels man towards good
and away from evil. Morality is written in the hearts of men.
Natural law is the original principle of the constitution called
"eternal laws of reason" or "the will of God." The context of
natural law is precisely our Filipino concept of pagpapakatao,
compelling an individual to be true to his nature as tao. When a
person debases himself by his immoral actions, he becomes less
than a person.

c) Human Law - This refers to the positive laws . This includes the
civil and criminal laws, though only in the light of practical reason
and moral laws. Human laws that are against natural law are not
real laws and people are not obliged obey those unjust laws.

d) Divine Law - This complements the other types of laws. it is a law

of revelation, disclosed through Sacred text of Scriptures of the
Church which is also directed toward man's eternal end. Though
concerned also with external aspects of conduct, the divine law is
more focused on how man can be holy and eventually attain
salvation. By virtue of a faculty of moral insight or conscience that
Thomas called synderesis, we also have natural inclinations to
some specific goods. Aquinas gives three sets of inclinations.
a) to survive, b) to reproduce and educate offspring and c) to know
the truth about God and to live peacefully in a society.

2. Features of Human Actions - Aquinas evaluates human actions not only on their
conformity to natural law but also of their specific features. He mentions three
aspects through which the morality of an act can be determined - in terms of its
a) species b) accidents and c) end

12
 a) Species - refers to its kind or the object of the action, Human deeds
are divided into two kind : good and bad some are indifferent or
neutral.

b) Accidents - refers to the circumstances surrounding the action. An

act is an event. There are conditions outside the act that influence
or affect the act by increasing or lessening its voluntariness or
freedom, thus affecting the morality of the act, these circumstances
or conditions are who, what, where, with, whom, why, how, and
where.

c) End - stands for the intention or purpose of the doer or agent. An

intention no matter how good it may be cannot redeem a bad act.
The end does not justify the means. Theft is bad. Hence stealing to
give the poor as in the case of Robin Hood is an unjust act.

Aquinas ethical theory states that an action is moral if its kind is good. The circumstance
is appropriate and the or intention is virtuous.

3. Happiness, Moral Virtues and Theological Virtues - Aquinas believes that all
actions are directed towards end and that happiness is the final end. This happiness is not equated
with pleasure, material possession, honor or any sensual good, but consists in activities in
accordance with virtue. Virtue is a good habit bearing on activity or a good faculty-habit.
According to Aquinas there are acquired and infused habits. In acquired habits the autonomous
will of a person plays a vital role as they involve consistent deliberate effort to do an act time and
again despite obstructions. The infused virtues are directly instilled by God in our faculties.
These virtues are divine gifts which elevate the activities of those who received them. Infused
values are of two kinds: 1) moral and 2) theological virtues. moral virtues are those that build the
character of a person. They are justice, fortitude, prudence, and temperance.

The theological virtues are concerned directly with God. They provide us with true
knowledge and desire of God and of his will. These are 1) faith 2) hope 3)love. They serve it to
attune us to our final end, which is God himself. Faith makes us recognize and believe in the true
God, hope makes us wish to be with him and love makes us desire and adore him. We ought to
exercise these virtues according to what God demands of us and according to our capacity as
individuals.

Vices and sins conflict with virtues. Faith has its counterpart, the sins of unbelief,
heresy and apostasy; the virtue of hope, the sins of despair and presumption, and charity or love,
the sins of hatred, envy, discord and sedition.

13
 An Analysis of Thomistic Ethics

One of Aquinas accomplishment in Ethics is being able to mention all of the things
that matter in ethical evaluation of action. He holds that the goodness and badness of an action
lies in the interior act of the will, in the external bodily act in the very nature of the act and even
its consequences. To him, what matters in morality is not only what one actually doe but also his
intention in doing the act. Thomistic Ethics does not fall into just one moral theory. By not
giving emphasis on the result of action is his so called features of actions. We can say that he is
more of deontologist or Kantian than utilitarian. Though his basic tenet that actions must be
directed to what is good relates to utilitarianism and consequentialism in general.

By advocating the roles played by virtues in morality Aquinas like Aristotle is a

virtue ethicists. However Aquinas rejects the belief of Aristotle that there are no universally true
general principle of morality. Sure enough the doctrine is incompatible with nihilism or the view
that denies the existence of values. It is also against relativism and conventionalism. Because
Aquinas believes that some basic principles about morality are knowable by all, he is against
absolute skepticion about value .

Thomistic Ethics is comparatively applicable. His prescriptions to do good, avoid

evil, pursue knowledge and live at peace with others suggest, that governments should uphold
scientific and technological endeavors that intend to produce advantages outcomes. The theory
recommends no production of weapon of mass destruction or the abuse of human beings for
others.
We can find many similarities between Aquinas' moral philosophy and that of his co-
theologies Augustine | To be acquainted with Augustine ethical theory you may read appendix C.
Thought to a large extent, Aquinas departs from the Augustinian view of the world as sin-laden
and disordered. He instead promotes Aristotle's positive view of the world as rational, humane
and ordered. Compared to Augustine, Aquinas is more inclined to view earthly happiness as also
desirable but insofar as those present goods are directed towards and subordinated to the
realization of everlasting ones in heaven,

14
LEARNING EXPERIENCES

A. Identification - Identify the term reffered to.

1. An excellence of moral or intellectual character.

2. The theory that is central to Plato's Philosophy
3. the virtuous concerned directly with God and provide us with true knowledge and
desire of God and his will.
4. THe mean between gluttony and extreme frugality.
5. The philosophers who believe that all actions are directed towards end and that
happiness is the final end.
6. He between that the ultimate human goal is self-realization.
7. typology of laws is central to the ethics of thus philosopher.
8. Circularity andd squareness are good examples of what this philosophers meant
by forms.
9. The Italian Philosopher and theologies hailed as the angelic doctor and the prince
of Scholarties.
10. He holds that ultimate happiness is not attainable in this life for happiness in
present is imperfect.

B. Enumeration:

1-2. Two kinds of virtues (Aristotle)

3-4. two kinds of Infused virtues (Aquinas)
5-8. Four basic moral virtues (Aristotle)
9-12. Four primary types of law (Aquinas)
13-15 Three aspects of through which the morality of an act can be determined.

C. Essay

To you, how do you attain true happiness?

15
LESSON III - Kant and Rights Theory

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) is a German thinker regarded as many as the most significant
philosopher in the modern era. His major contributioNs to Ethics are found in his tur works. The
Foundation of the Meta-physics of Morals and the Critique of Practical Reason

A. Kantian Ethics

1. Good Will - Kant believes that when we wish to determine the moral status of an
action, we consult reason. He believes that one of the functions and capacities of our reason
is to produce a will which is good not a means to some further end, but good in itself. To
him, the good will is the highest good and the condition of all other goods. Good will is the
only intrinsically good.

A good will is one that habitually wills rightly. A good person is one who acts from a
sense of duty. Acting from a sense of duty means exhibiting good will even in the face of
difficulty. We act morally when we restrain our feelings and inclinations and do what we are
obliged to do. Morally as Kant sees it, is essentially connected with duties and obligations.
Acting morally entails acting from the motive of duty regardless of the consequences.

Therefore, it is only when we recognize that we ought tot do an act because it is our
duty, understand the nature of this obligation and act upon it that we perform an
authentically moral act.

2. Categorical imperative - Kant puts emphasis on the relevance of good will and
acting from a sense of duty. But then can a person know what is his duty in a given
situation? Kant believes yes. First, it is one’s duty, as rational being to act on principle or
maxim as contrasted to simply act on impulse. For example, a man wants to help a certain
lady who is in need, merely because he likes her personally, and he might not give the same
help to another woman exactly in a similar situation because he does not like her. This is
acting on impulse.

Here is another man who gives relief or help to total strangers who are victims of
calamity because he accepts as a duty to provide supports to those in need, he treats the same
manner any other person whose situation has the same characteristics. This is acting on

16
principle or maxim. Maxim is a general rule or principle which serves as guide to action.
E.g. “be honest always” A maxim is moral, dictated by reason and has imperative or
commanding force.

Maxims according to Kant has two classes 1) hypothetical and 2) categorical

imperative. Hypothetical means being true only under some condition and therefore not
universally true or valid. Accordingly, a hypothetical imperative is how reason orders one to
achieve one’s specific ends such as: if you wish to pass, then study hard.

Hypothetical imperative is both contingent and derivative. It is contingent or conditional

like where studying hard would still not result is passing, in such situation the maxim may
no longer be accepted. It is derivative because acceptance of it depends on one’s wish to
pass. If one does not want to pass, the principle may be ignored.

Categorical imperative is binding on all rational agents, in all circumstances at all times.
It demands actions without qualification, without any ifs and without regard to the
consequences such an act may produce. Therefore, it is Kant’s moral philosophy that an act
is morally good if ti is done for the sake of a morally good maxim; and a maxim is morally
good if it conforms to the categorical imperative.

Kant provides various formulations of the categorical imperative. The most famous is
“universalizability” formulation which means a person ought always to behave as if his
coourse of conduct were to become a universal code of behaviour.

As illustration, Kant takes the case of a lying promise. A person,having run out of
money borrows from someone thought he is sure he will not be able to pay it back. He is
acting on the “When in need of money, borrow from someone by making a lying promise”.
This does not pass the categorical imperative. Reason cannot will or allow that everyone
should act on this maxim, otherwise, all human relation based upon trust and honoring one’s
promises would drastically collapse.

Another famous formulation is the “end in itself” which means that to respect person as
ends in themselves and not only means to further self interest. This is acknowledging the

17
 person as a human being with goals and treating him with dignity. An example of this is the
man who borrows money and intends not to pay it back. The promisor does not treat the
promisee with honor but matter a means or instrument to attain his aim to gain the wanted
amount.

B. An Analysis of Kantian Ethics

Kant’s ethical system is sensible and plausible. In fact, when we try to prove that one’s
action is unethical we ask him, “What if everybody behaved as you do?” actually advocating
Kant’s “universalizability” formulation of categorical imperative. However, one may argue
that it’s just another way of stating the golden rule. “Do onto others, as you would have
others do unto you. The end-in-itself version instructs us to respect others because that’s
how we treat ourselves.

Kant’s doctrine of categorical imperative holds that some actions like lying are wrong
regardless of the circumstances and the outcomes of the act. Critics argue that if lying is the
only way to safeguard a person then lying is what one must do. For instance, a murderer
armed with a shotgun, comes looking for a family member friend to kill her, should we
reveal her whereabouts because we ought tot tell the truth?

In his belief that we must always do our duties no matter what circumstances are Kant
puts priority to rules matter than on humans. Kant’s ethics lacks solution to instances when
there is conflict of duties. Suppose a person promised to keep a secret and then another
person asked him about it. He cannot tell the truth without breaking his promise which is
logically impossible.

Kant’s theory concerning enjoyment in doing virtuous differs from that of Aristotle. For
Aristotle, the genuinely virtuous person totally enjoys carrying out moral acts. But for Kant,
a moral act is contrary to one’s feelings, inclinations and wishes. To him, distress of well-
doing is even considered as a sign of virtue. Moreover, Kant’s theory would go against
Christian Philosophy’s emphasis on love, for love is basically a story of liking or desire.
Applied religiously, Kant’s theory goes against the biblical decree to worship and serve God
with joyful heart.

In summary, Kant contributes much to the study of morality. It affirms our

consciousness of the moral law based on our practical reason. Kant defines human dignity as
resting on the attainment of moral character. His categorical imperative supports that all

18
 people are equal. So discrimination is not good. Moreover, theory forbids us to behave in an
inconsistent and hypocritical matter.

C. Rights Theory

The principle of right theory is the notion that in order for a society to be Efficacious,
government must approach the making and enforcement of laws with the right intentions in
respect to the end goals of the society that it governs. Kant’s principle of rights theory
teaches that it is not only the outcome of the action that is important but also the reason
behind them, because if the intent is evil then the outcome is also evil.

Rights Based Ethics - The concept of rights based ethics is that “there are some rights,
both positive and negative, that all humans have based only on the fact that they are human.
These rights can be natural or conventional. Natural created by humans and reflect society’s
values.

Examples of Rights Based Ethics System include the following. (“Rights Based
Ethics”,n.d)

A. The right to life

B. The right to liberty
C. The right to pursue happiness
D. The right to a jury trial
E. The right to a lawyer
F. The right to to freely practice a religion of choice
G. The right to express ideas or opinion with freedom as an individual
H. The right of individuals or organizations to express opinion or share
information freely in written medium
I. The right to come together and meet in order to achieve goals
J. The right to be informed of what law has been broken if arrested
K. The right to call witnesses to speak on one’s beha;f if accused of a crime.
L. The right of a person to be treated with respect and dignity even after beign
found guilty of a crime.

19
 M. The right to freely live and travel within the country.
N. The right to work
O. The right to marry
P. The right to bear children
Q. The right to free education
R. The right to join any peaceful parties or groups of choice
S. The right to to be free from slavery
T. The right to not be tortured
U. The right to be treated as others
V. The right to be considered to be innocent until proven guilty
W. The right to personal privacy
X. The right to own a property

The Ball of Rights of the United States of the America and the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights uphold the Values of a Right Based Ethics. To have a right is to be in a
position to determine one’s choices, what others should do or need not to do. Rights can be
legal in nature or pertain to human rights and moral rights.

D. Legal vs. Moral Rights

What is legal is not always moral, and sometimes what is moral is not or necessarily
legal is particular country. What is being moral and being legal are related but not one and
the same. Moral rights refer to what ought to be, whereas legal rights are those on books.
Moral rights represent the natural law while legal rights embody the conventional positive
law.

1. Legal Rights - Legal rights demote all the rights found within legal codes.
Technically, a legal right does not exist prior to its passing into law and the limits of its
validity are not set by the jurisdiction of the body which passed its legislation.

2. Moral Rights - Moral rights are rights that “exist prior to and independent from their
legal counterparts. The existence and validity of a moral right is not dependent upon the
actions of jurists and legislators.
It must be clear that human rights cannot be reduced to or exclusively identified with
legal rights. In fact, some human rights are best identified as moral rights. Human rights are
meant to apply all human beings universally regardless of whether or not they have attained
legal recognition by all countries. Human rights are best thought of as being both moral and
legal rights. The legitimacy claims of human rights are connected to their status as moral
rights and the efficacy of human rights is dependent upon their developing into legal rights.

20
21
Learning Experiences

Identification: Identify the term being referred to.

1. It is what we consult when we wish to determine the moral status of an action

2. What Kant believes as the highest good and the condition of all other goods.
3. It is a general rule or principle which serves as guides to action

22
4. These rights are best thought of as moral and legal.
5. These rights exist to prior to and independently from their legal counterparts.
6. All the rights found within existing legal codes.
7. It demands actions without qualification
8. The term entails being true only under some conditions
9. Justified claim that individuals and group can make upon other individuals or upon society
[Link] is what we ought to do despite our inclination or taste to do so.
[Link] Kantian principle that if a course of action cannot be universally adopted, it is not
morally permissible.
12. Kant’s Theory that teaches that it is not merely the outcome of actions that is important but
also the reason behind it.

True or False: Write T if the statement is true and F if its false.

1. Kant teaches that for an act to be moral, it must be done from a sense of duty dictated by
reason.
2. Kant thinks that acting from a sense of duty means exhibiting good evil even in the face of
difficulty.
3. Kant agrees with many ethicists that happiness is the sonnum bonum
4. He believes that feelings can help discern what is right or wrong.
5. For Kant, happiness when not combined with goodwill is worthless.

23
LESSON IV - Utilitarianism

A. Utilitarianism Explained
The moral theory of Utilitarianism is perhaps the most prominent in the last two
centuries. Its proponents are Jeremy Bentham (1748 - 1832) and John Stuart Mill (1808-
1873)

Utilitarianism is the most influential consequential theory. Derived from the Latin term
utilis which means useful, it states that what is useful is good, and the moral value of an
action is determined by the utility or usefulness of its results or consequences. It explains
that those actions that bring about favorable effects are moral while those produce bad or
damaging results are immoral. Utilitarianism opposes ethical theories that consider God’s
will or some inner sense of faculty like the conscience to be the final arbiter of morality.

The principle of utility can be applied to either particular actions or Act utilitarianism or
to general rules called Rule Utilitarianism.

1. Act Utilitarianism - The right act is defined as one which brings about
best results or the least amount of bad results.
2. Rule Utilitarianism - Moral and immoral actions are defined as
following or breaking rules.

Bentham’s Utilitarianism - The principle of utility states that an action is right if it

produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number. The supreme objective of human action
is the greatest happiness for the greatest number. The principle of utility evaluates ethically
human action, state laws and legal system.

24
 For Bentham, nothing else but pleasure is intrinsically good. Though he recognizes four
sources of pleasure-- the physical, moral, religious, and political. The physical source is the basis
of all the others. The pleasure of only one kind is of no importance to the quality of pleasures.

Dubbed as quantitative hedonist or quantitative utilitarian, Bentham created a detailed

method, the hedomic calculus to calculate the quantitative worth of pleasures. The method has
seven criteria to quantify the amount of pleasure of pain an action brings about - 1) intensity 2)
duration 3)certainty 4)propinquity or remoteness 5)fecundity or fruitfulness 6)purity and 7)extent
to which pleasure and pain are shared among the greatest number of people. In general,
utilitarianism determines the moral value of an act by calculating the sum of pleasure it caused
and the amount of pain generated. For Bentham, punishment can only be justified if it stops
people from perpetuating future harms.

Mill’s Utilitarianism - John Stuart Mill is the most famous proponent in Utilitarianism after
Bentham. Like Bentahm, he advocated the greatest happiness principle which states that it is the
greatest happiness of the greatest number that is the measure of right and wrong.

There are two central aspects which differ Mill from Bentham. First, distinguished between
higher and lower or those which animals too, can experience such as those from food, drink, and
sex. Believing that some pleasures are intrinsically superior to others, Mill famously declared,
“It is better to e a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied; better to be Socrates
dissatisfied than a fool satisfied. By higher pleasures”. Mill means intellectual like artistic,
political and even spiritual pleasures. These are more desirable and valuable pleasures
exclusively for humans like reaching a good novel or poetry, listening to music, enjoying visual
arts, solving scientific or mathematical problems etc. For him, a happiness that is made up
principally of higher pleasure is a higher, deeper, truer and more valuable form of happiness.
Happiness and unhappiness are the bases for good and evil.

The second central aspect that differs Mill from Bentham is the secondary principles. He
believes that the past experiences can teach us which kinds of action promote happiness and
which not. Actions are justified by their consequences manifested in past experiences.

25
B. An Analysis of Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism is against Kantian Ethics. While Kant proposes that an act is justified by the
person’s motive to perform his duty. Bentham and Mill hold that actions are morally evaluated
through their consequences. Utilitarianism is anchored on the pleasure and pain concepts. As it is
based on the perceptible effect, it promotes action that empirically improves life on earth.
Therefore, Utilitarianism inspires and encourage people to act morally, even if one does not
believe that in an afterlife, for moral actions can be observed to improve life on earth.

Utilitarianism allows for exception to the rule if justified by the consequences; that is the
actions generate the greatest happiness for the greatest number. Kant theory is that this is an act
transgressing and exception less rule. Nonetheless, utilitarianism receive some negative
criticisms. It is not easy to foresee with certainly the consequences of action. To consider the
total number of outcomes before an act can be declared right or wrong is also problematic.

By giving moral importance exclusively to the consequences of actions bring complication.

For example, a student may think to cheat to pass the course. If he does not cheat he will surely
fail in the exam. Cheating therefore is justified as it will maximize pleasures and minimize pains.
This happiness if we totally disregard the act or the means in the moral evaluation of action.
“Does the end always justify the means?”

Finally, Utilitarianism indicates that an act is right even if it is done from an evil motive.
Obviously, a society where people act from evil motives is a creepy place to live in regardless of
the consequences of their actions.

C. Business Fascination with Utilitarianism

Utilitarianism basically teaches that a decision regarding business conduct is proper if and
only if the decision results to the greatest good for the greatest number of persons. Business
executives embrace the utilitarian approaches to ethical problems because they are so compatible
with traditional business thinking. Just as Utilitarianism seeks to maximize happiness, or the
good, business executives usually hope to maximize profit, return on investment or share price.
If a business person concludes that the greatest good is the same as highest profitability thus

26
produces the most benefits for society, his philosophy is very much compatible to Utilitarianism
which is focused on maximum results.

27
Learning Experiences

True or False: Write T if the statement is true and F if its false.

1. Utilitarian is teological
2. Utilitarian is compatible to Kantian Theory
3. Utilitarian determines the moral value of an act by the nature of an act itself
4. Higher pleasures means intellectual which includes artistic, political and spiritual
pleasures.
5. Cheating is justified in utilitarian if it will maximize pleasure and minimize
pains.
6. Mill proposes that happiness and unhappiness are the bases of good and evil.
7. Mill believes that physical pleasures are experiences too by animals
8. Utilitarianism is the most understood and normally applied in business.
9. Mill advocates the greatest happiness principle
10. Bentham differentiate the lower and higher pleasures.

Identification: Identify the term referred to.

1. He proposed the basic form of Utilitarianism

2. He defended and improved the basic form of Utilitarianism
3. It is a consequentialist theory, a subclass of teleological moral theory.
4. A method to calculate the quantitative worth of pleasure
5. The philosopher who explained that happiness is not only sensual pleasure.

28
 6. The ethics that proposes that action, rules, or polices should be ethically
evaluated by their consequences.
7. The principle of utility which defines the right act is the one that brings about the
best results
8. It holds that a moral act is one that results to the greatest happiness to the greatest
number of persons.
9. He is doubted as a quantitative hedonist.
10. The English term for the Latin word “utilis”

Essay:

Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the Utilitarianism theory

Lesson IV - Justice and Fairness

Rawls is considered the most important American Philosopher of the 20th century. He rejects
Utilitarianism and offers a numbers of arguments against such theory. Rawls maintains that
slavery is wrong under all situation for it does not respect the fundamental rights of liberaties of
all persons. Slavery is wrong for it does not consider individual rights invidable.

1. Rawls’ Justice as Fairness

29
 Rawls called his concept of social justice “Justice as Fairness” which consists of two
principles.

A. First Principle of social justice is often called the Liberty Principle - concerns
political institution.

“Each person has the same and indefeasible (permanent) claim to a fully adequate
scheme of equal liberties which scheme is compatible with the same scheme of
liberties for all”. This means that everybody has the same basis of liberties which
can never be taken away. This first principle is very Kantian. It provides for basic
and universal respect for individuals as a minimum standard for all just institutions.

Rawls gave examples of the liberties in the U.S Bill of Rights, such as freedom of
speech and due process of law. Rawls also recognized the right of the private
persons, corporations or workers to own a private property. However, he omitted the
right to own the means of production such as mines, factories, farm, and the right to
inherit wealth because in his view these things were not basic. Rawls agreed that
basic liberties could be limited, but only for the sake of liberty. Restricting the
liberties of others may be justified.

B. Second Principle of Justice consisted of “fair equality of opportunity” and the

“Difference Principle” - concerns social and economic institutions. (John Rawls and
his theory of Justice.”n.d)

“Social and economic inequalities are to satisfy two conditions 1) they are under
condition of fair equality of opportunity and 2) they are to be to the greatest benefit
of the least advantaged members of society (The Difference Principle) Rawls
proposed that jobs must be open to everybody by the society granting fair equality
of opportunity. Society should eradicate th is communication and afford easy
access to education.

Rawls preferred maximizing the improvement of the least-advantaged group under

the Difference Principle. A guaranteed minimum income or minimum wage should

30
 then be provided. Rawls believed that his Justice as Fairness Principles, is for the
least advantaged for forming a just society.

2. Evaluation of Rawls’ Principles

Rawls’ Justice as Fairness Principles do not allow ample tolerance for various
religious beliefs. For instance a certain religion teaches men and women are unequal in
some aspects and parts in life, these beliefs are against Rawls’ Principles about equality
of basic liberties and opportunity. Rawls’ Difference Principles is controversial with the
idea that the greatest benefit must go to the least advantaged. Some people deserve a
higher level of material goods because of their productiveness and diligence or
contribution to society.

Rawls admitted himself that his concept of just society was highly idealized thus a
little support is given from our public culture.

3. Distributive Justice

Justice as Fairness Principle is an example of a social justice concept called

distributive justice. It is concerned with the nature of a socially just allocation of goods
to society members. Distributive Justice is if rewards and costs are allocated according
to the designated distributive norms of the group.

Common Types of Distributive Norms

A. Equity - Members’ outcomes should be based on their investments. An

individual who has invested a large amount of input (e.g. time, money, energy)
should received more than someone who has contributed very little. Members of
large groups prefer to base allocation of rewards and costs on equity.

31
 B. Equality- Regardless of their input, all members of the group have equal share of
the rewards/costs. Someone who contributes 20% of the group’s resources receives
as much as someone who contributes 50%.

C. Power - Those in authority, status or control over the group receive more than
those in lower level position.

D. Need - Those in greatest needs should be provided with resources needed to

excel those needs; Regardless of their inputs they are given more resources than
those who already possess them.

E. Responsibility - Group members who have the most share their resources with
those who have less.

Rawls theory of Justice exhibits a simple idea. That is, that the concern of
distributive justice is to compensate persons for misfortune. Some are blessed with good
luck some are cursed with bad luck and it is the obligation of society to revise the
distribution of goods and evils that ascends from the gamble of lotteries that constitute
human life. Some are fortunate to be born affluent or rich or into a fortunate socializing
setting, or with the tendency to be fascinating, bright, determined, and the like. These
individuals are likely to be prosperous in the economic marketplace and to attain
success. It the other hand, some people as we say are born to lose. For Rawls therefore,
distributive justice demands that the lucky ought to allocate some or all of their gains
due to luck to the unlucky.

Socio-Economic-political theories have differentiated but somewhat related, view

of distributive justice

A. Egalitarian - It holds that without exception all society members have exactly
equal amount of resources. Simpler Egalitarian theories are satisfied with the view
that everybody should be given, at all cost, completely equal quantity of some basic
material goods like money. More refined egalitarian thinkers say that such
distribution have shortcomings. Say for example handicapped persons who have
greater needs for which they are not themselves responsible would get less
fulfillment than others, because they use a great share of their resources only to
catch up with others. Moreover, the lazy and idle people would be rewarded and the
skillful and hardworking would be discouraged.

32
Adherents of egalitarianism searched for some complex measure of goods that
would be given to everyone in equal amounts but would not commit similar bad
consequences. Several egalitarian measures were proposed like “ that everyone
should be equally happy, that everyone should not only have equal amount of
material resources but also an equal power to use their resources, that evryone
should have an equal chance to be happy, and the like (Strict Egalitarianism,n.d.).

Rawls’ “Justice as Fairness principle is often called Rawisian Egalitarianism” But

one of Rawls’ tenets suggests that inequalities are permissible but only if they meet
some [Link] Rawl’s principles are not strictly egalitarian and striclty
[Link] is in between these two extreme. Some argue that his principles are
defense of egalitarian liberalism

B. Capitalist Laissez - Faire capitalist distributive justice is when people,

businesses and corporation perform based on their individual self-interest for their
own benefit. For Rawls, pure laissez-faire capitalism is unjust because it tends to
generate an unfair distribution of wealth and income concentrated in the hands of the
few.

According to Rawls a just society would be a “property-owning democracy” in

which ownership of the means of production is broadly distributed and those who
are worst off are affluent enough to be economically independent.

C. Socialist - It is a system where the government or a central authority controls the

production of goods and services, Former Soviet Union ( 1918-1989) practiced the
state socialism India also practiced this system from independence from the British
in 1947 to the early 1990.

A better version of a socialist distributive justice is democratic socialism. Also

called “Welfare democracy” democratic socialist distributive justice has system of
social insurance to help disadvantaged persons. The system incorporates free-market
principles in producing goods and service with the general principles about
compassion and concern for others Some economic sectors such as health care,
energy distribution, transportation and aerospace may be owned or controlled by the
governments.

33
 European democratic socialist countries like Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands
practice this system, Japan also implements the principle of distributive justice.

D. State and Citizen Responsibility

Taxation and Inclusive Growth. Taxation is a means by which the state and its
citizen accomplished their responsibilities to each other. Taxation is defined as, as
means by which states or governments finance their expenditures, basically and
ideally to constituents, by imposing charges on them and corporate entities.
Government expenditures fundamentally involves social welfare programs for
citizens.

Democratic socialism works hand in hand with capitalism, free markets and private
property. The system requires paying high taxes to help pay for a wide range of
state-funded social services like universal health care, benefits, more vacation days
and substantial benefits for mothers and children.

Taxation and social welfare programs are related to another concept called inclusive
growth. Inclusive growth is economic group that creates opportunity for all
segments of the population and distributes the dividends of increased prosperity both
in monetary and non-monetary terms, family across society. (Inclusive Growth,”n.d)

In many capitalist countries,people have not seen their income increase for many
years, The gap between rich and poor has enlarged, with those at the top seizing the
“lion’s share of growth. Increasing inequality in earnings and in wealth is a major
concern in many countries. In capitalism, growth is not trickled down to everybody.
Thus democratic socialism not capitalism result into inclusive growth.

34
Learning Experiences

True or False: Write T if the statement is true and F if its false.

1. The elements of both Kantian and utilitarianism philosophy were used by Rawls in
describing a method for the moral evaluation of social and political institution.
2. Thomas Jefferson had theorized that people in the distant past had fashioned a social
contract between themselves and their leader.
3. Simpler Egalitarian theories are satisfied with the view that everybody should be given,
at all costs, completely equal of some basic material goods, like money.
4. Those with more authority, status, or control over the group should receive more than those
in lower level position.
5. Slavery is wrong not because it is unproductive or inefficient but because it is unjust, for it
does not consider individual rights inviolable.
6. The “thought experiment” is hypothetical version of the social contract concept.
7. By taking into the account the value of rationality, Rawls added a condition to assure that the
choice of social justice principles would truly be unbiased,
8. For Rawls, pure laissez-faire capitalism is also unjust, because it tends to generate an unfair
distribution of wealth and income concentrated in the hands of a few.
9. European democratic socialist countries like Denmark, Sweden, and the Netherlands
practice state socialist distributive justice system.
10. Jean Jacques Rosseau’s “Justice as Fairness’ principle is an example of a social justice
concept called distributive justice.

Identification : Identify the term being referred to

1. This is a set of closely related socioeconomic political theories that without exemption
promote the proposition that all society members ought tot have exactly equal amount of
resources.
2. This is Rawls’ First Principle of social justice which concerns political institutions.
3. This is considered as better version of socialist distributive justice
4. In social psychology, this is defined as perceived fairness of how rewards and costs are
shared by, or distributed across, group members.
5. This is a system subscribed to by Thomas Jefferson in writing the declaration of
Independence.
6. This is a system where the government or a central authority controls the production of
goods and services.

35
7. The American political philosopher who was considered by many as the most important
political philosopher of the 20th century.
8. This occurs when people, businesses, and corporations perform based on their individual
self-interest for their own benefit.
9. This is the standard of behaviour that is required, desired, or designated as normal within
a specific method.
10. Rawls maintained this as wrong under all situations, regardless of any utility calculation,
for it does not respect the fundamental rights and liberties of all persons.

Essay:

Differentiate the capitalist and socialist view of justice.

36
37