Republic of the Philippines

BACOLOD CITY COLLEGE

Taculing Road, Bacolod City
Commission on Higher Education
Bachelor of Secondary Education Major in Mathematics
(1st Year – F)

EDU102:
The Teaching Profession

Moral and Non-Moral

Moral Dilemma
Foundation of Morality

Group 3
Evangelista, Mary Jane
Gomeza, Jenny Love
Gonzales, Denise
Libuna, Prince
Lombrino, Heart

Instructor: Dr. Rhod Torbela

 Moral and Non-moral Standards
Standard is the level of quality of attainment. It is an idea or thing used as a measure, norm, or
model in comparative evaluation.
It is important to note that different societies have different moral beliefs and that our beliefs are
deeply influenced by our own culture and context. For this reason, some values do have moral
implications, while others don't.
Moral standards are norms that individuals or groups have about the kinds of actions believed to
be morally right or wrong, as well as the values placed on what we believe to be morally good or
morally bad. It normally promotes “the good," that is, the welfare and well-being of humans as
well as animals and the environment.
Moral standards, therefore, prescribe what humans ought to do in terms of rights and obligations.
According to some scholars, moral standards are the sum of combined norms (general rules about
actions or behaviors) and values (enduring beliefs about what is good and desirable, or not). In
other words, norms plus values equal moral standards.
For example, we may say, “We are always under the obligation to fulfill our promises” or “It is
always believed that killing innocent people is absolutely wrong." On the other hand, values are
understood as enduring beliefs or statements about what is good, desirable, or not. For example,
we may say, “Helping the poor is good” or “Cheating during exams is bad.”.
The characteristics of moral standards mentioned by Velasquez (2012)
1. Moral standards deal with matters we think can seriously injure or benefit humans, animals,
and the environment, such as child abuse, rape, and murder.
2. Moral standards are not established or changed by the decisions of authoritative individuals
or bodies. Indeed, moral standards rest on the adequacy of the reasons that are taken to
support and justify them. For sure, we don’t need a law to back up our moral conviction
that killing innocent people is absolutely wrong.
3. Moral standards are overriding; that is, they take precedence over other standards and
considerations, especially those of self-interest. Moral standards are based on impartial
considerations. Hence, moral standards are fair and just.
4. Moral standards are associated with special emotions (such as guilt and shame) and
vocabulary (such as right, wrong, good, and bad).

Non-moral standards refer to standards by which we judge what is good or bad and right or
wrong in a non-moral way.
Examples of non-moral standards are:
1. standards of etiquette by which we judge manners as good or bad,
2. standards we call the law by which we judge something as legal or illegal,
3. and standards of aesthetics by which we judge art as good or rubbish.
Characteristics of Non-Moral Standards
1. Welfare of non-beings
2. Relies on authority-law
3. Religion, tradition
4. Limits hegemony
5. Focused on self-interest
Hence, we should not confuse morality with etiquette, law, aesthetics, or even religion. As we can
see, non-moral standards are matters of taste or preference. Moral standards refer to the guidelines
that we have for the types of acts we find morally permissible and acceptable.
Finally, as a way of distinguishing moral standards from non-moral ones, if a moral standard says
“Do not harm innocent people” or “Don’t steal”, a non-moral standard says “Don’t text while
driving” or “Don’t talk while the mouth is full”

Moral Dilemma
Moral Dilemmas are situations where persons, who are called “moral agents” in ethics, are forced
to choose between two or more conflicting options, neither of which resolves the situation in a
morally acceptable manner.
Conditions to be called a moral dilemma
a) The person or the agent of a moral action is obliged to make decision about which course
of action is best.
b) There must be different courses of action to choose from.
c) No matter which course of action the moral agent chooses, there is always that moral
principle that is compromised.

In moral dilemmas, according to Benjiemen Labastin, 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 that she ought to do. In other words, by choosing one of the possible
moral requirements, the person also fails on others.”
Types of Moral Dilemma
1. Epistemic Moral Dilemmas
• There are two or more requirements that conflict with each other; The moral agent
hardly knows which one takes precedence over the other.
2. Ontological Moral Dilemmas
• There are two or more requirements that conflict with each other, yet neither of
these conflicting moral requirements overrides each other.
• Neither of the moral requirements is stronger than the other; hence, the moral agent
can hardly choose between the conflicting moral requirements.
3. Self-Imposed Moral Dilemma
• Caused by the moral agent’s wrong doings
4. World-Imposed Moral Dilemma
• William Styron stated that this means that certain events in the world place the
moral agent in a situation of moral conflict.
5. Obligation Dilemmas
• More than one feasible action is obligatory
6. Prohibition Dilemmas
• All feasible actions are forbidden
7. Single Agent Dilemma
• The agent “ought, all things considered, to do A, ought, all things considered, to do
B, and he cannot do both A and B.
8. Multi-Person Dilemma
• One agent, P1, ought to do A, a second agent, P2, ought to do B, and though each
agent can do that he ought to do, it is not possible both for P1 to do A and P2 to do
B. The multi-person dilemma requires more than choosing what is right; it is also
entails that the persons involved reached a general consensus.
 Foundation of Morality
Morality refers to the set of standards that enable people to live cooperatively in groups. It’s
what societies determine to be “right” and “acceptable.”
Morality is defined into two kinds:
1. Descriptive Morality simply describes the beliefs reported or behavior observed.
• Refers to a certain code of conduct put forward by a society or a group (such as
religion), or accepted by an individual for her own behavior.
• Refers to personal or cultural values, codes of conduct or social mores. It does not
connote objective claims of right or wrong, but only refers to that which is
considered right or wrong.
2. Normative Morality refers to principles that tell people what the majority of people believe
or do, inferring that this is the "proper" behavior.
• Refers to a code of conduct that given specified conditions, would be put forward
by all rational persons.
• Refers to whatever (if anything) is actually right or wrong, which may be
independent of the values or mores held by any particular people or cultures.
Where does our morality come from?
• The home and family play an important part in influencing our moral outlook. Our parents
were the first people to teach us the difference between right and wrong. For example: As
children we learned that it is good to share our toys, to always tell the truth and not hit other
children.
• As grow older we begin to be influenced by others outside the home. Going to school,
making friends and mixing with other children our own age meant we encountered different
types of values. Therefore, it can be said that our friends and peers also play an important
role in influencing our moral outlook.
• People’s moral outlook is strongly influenced by the religion and church in which they
have been brought up. Many young people go to schools with religious ethos where they
are educated in their faith. Therefore, the values that they received at home are reinforced
by the teachings and practices of their religion.
• State and society play an important role in deciding our moral outlook. The State passes
the laws of the country. Society also plays an important role in influencing our moral
outlook as it can decide what is accepted as good or bad. Usually when the majority of the
society behave in a certain way then that behavior can become acceptable.
• We can be influenced by our emotions to behave in certain ways. This can be a positive
impact on us in situations where we are moved by sympathy or compassion to help
somebody in need. Emotions can also provide us with negative outcomes when we are
driven by anger or hatred when responding to certain situation.
Reason and Impartiality as Minimum Requirement for Morality

1. Reason is the basis or motive for an action, decision, or conviction. As a quality, it refers
to the capacity for logical, rational, and analytic thought; it involves justification or
justifying. Reason is a necessary requirement for. In the case of moral judgments, they
require backing by reasons. Truth in ethics entails being justified by good reasons.
2. Impartiality involves the idea that each individual’s interests and point of view are
equally important. It is a principle of justice. Impartiality in morality requires that we
give equal and/or adequate consideration to the interests of all concerned parties. It
assumes that every person, generally speaking, is equally important; that is, no one is
seen as intrinsically more significant than anyone else.

Moral valuation is a domain of conscience functioning in which moral rules and their
justifications are socially referenced in relationship to authority, self, and peers.
One crucial assumption in making moral valuation of certain acts and ascribing moral
responsibility to a moral agent is reason. Rationality has always been considered as a power of
man that separates himself from the rest of the species. The capacity to reason proves that a
person’s desire for truth is but an in-born ability.
Through this ability, man is able to assess his actions. That any act, relative to his power of reason,
implies a particular nature.
Three ways to judge an action
1. Act (itself): Good or Evil
2. End: The Goal of an Action
3. Circumstance: The Surrounding Factor Affecting One’s Choice
From the considerations above, one can know that the whole gamut of judging an act and the
possible trajectory of a multi-layered consideration and discussion concerning ethics runs the
intricate way of inferential points from established positions. For instance, an act that is good with
a good end but a wrong circumstance becomes, and still, a wrong or evil act.
Second element or assumption is freedom. It is considered an important element in making moral
valuation and without which, no amount of reasoning can justify the ethical value of an act. We
say, moral action can only emanate from individuals who act according to their choice or free will
to do good. Moral valuation and moral responsibility cannot therefore be ascribed to actions devoid
of the freedom to act and as such they are not qualified as moral action. Forcing someone to do an
act will not make the person morally responsible for the action taken.
An act is considered human act with moral responsibility when it is undertaken on the basis of free
choice or with a sense of freedom. Without the element of freedom, no amount of explanation can
declare someone morally responsible over the act.
For Immnuel Kant, human autonomy (freedom) is the principal foundation of morality. Kant
pointed out that moral rights apply only to free agents who have the capacity to regulate behavior
and have in their power, at the time of their actions, either to act rightly or not. Hence, when we
make choices, we must act “under the idea of freedom” (Morality as Freedom, n.d.). Freedom
then becomes the foundation of a moral act.
 REFERENCES
https://www.studocu.com/ph/document/adamson-university/ethics/handout-2-moral-and-non-
moral/12131760?origin=home-recent-2&fbclid=IwAR3-h82rrbAN2EPAiD5ifwkIb9A85WJOl5-
IOZhR0tEktWMDVapn94A7m18
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jwOQ7ZqDWN4
https://www.studocu.com/ph/document/university-of-eastern-pangasinan/science-technology-and-
society/ge-8-ethics-module-3-foundation-and-requirement-for-morality/31813452
https://www.studocu.com/ph/document/pangasinan-state-university/ethics/reason-impartiality-as-
minimum-requirement-for-morality/27328044