COURSE: ETHICS AND INTEGRITY

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

ETHICS (Moral philosophy)

-The branch of philosophy is concerned with the nature of moral reality. Ethics is derived from a

Greek word, ethos which means custom or habit. Ethics therefore studies human conduct. We

build or moral character through habit of either doing good or bad.

Integrity: it is living and acting in accordance with a given moral code.

Scope of ethics

-Ethics is only bound to looking at human way of conduct. In fact, the scope of human ethics is

human acts and not acts of human. Though, animals have their behavior, it is not within the scope

of ethics. Animals do not therefore have moral conduct; they lack capacity to rationalize and to

choose. Brutes are guided by instincts.

Ethics therefore takes interest in those acts: that ought to do; those acts which man ought not to do

and finally those acts which man may either do or not do. The scope of ethics is therefore human

conduct. Human conduct consists of all those actions which we perform willingly and consciously.

-What constitute to human conduct are those actions which proceed out of our will and conscience.

Such kind of actions is what we may refer to them as human acts. Human acts are voluntary unlike

acts of human which are involuntary and we cannot be held accountable for doing them.

1
-Ethics is not interested with anything else but in making a comparison between what we do and

what ought us to do. Those actions which man ought to do, we term them as right action and those

actions which man ought not to do, we term them as wrong actions.

Why study Ethics?

i. It enables us to understand how ought us to behave as well as how ought us not to behave.

ii. Ethics gives us capacity to liberate on ethical questions guided ethical moral theories.

iii. The discipline equips one with knowledge of deciding and evaluation how is relating with him

or herself as well as how one is relating with others.

iii. Studying ethics enhances our capacity to decide what is right, good and just due to norms.

Normative ethics enables us to make ethical decisions on basis of, how good, right and just they

are.

iv. It enables us to render our actions as right or wrong, good or bad guided by the canons or rules

of morality.

v. It enables one to answer the question on “what is good for man?” We have quest for that which

is good. We are able to differentiate good life from one which is not.

vi. Ethics enables one to have the aptitude to define a good way of living from a wrong one as well

as doing what one ought to do from what one ought not to do.

UNIT TWO: TYPES OF ACTS

All our actions discussed under ethics are voluntary. We act to attain a given end. Always the end

is the good. We act to achieve something whether benefiting us now or in the future. We can ever

2
act for no reason. The last end of man is the possession of happiness. One cannot attain a given

end without means, end require means to achieve it. Always it is the means that justifies an end

and not verse versa. If you use wrong means to attain an end, it means that the end though good

from a moral perspective the act should be rendered as wrong since it violates moral norms.

CATEGORIES(KINDS) OF ACTS

We can categories our actions as human beings into two: voluntary (human acts) and

involuntary (acts of human).

i. Human acts

They are also referred to as actus humanus. In such actions, man becomes the master since he can

deliberately and willingly choose to act or not to act. Such actions are out of free will and

consciousness. We can be taken to give an account concerning them. In other terms, we can be

held responsible for it of them. Such action proceeding out of free choice and full awareness are

what constitutes to human conduct. In fact, such actions are the subject matter of ethics.

ii. Acts of human

Such actions are also called, actus hominis. They do not proceed out of free will and

consciousness. Thus, they are involuntary. We cannot be taken to task for doing or not doing such

actions. Man is not therefore the master of such actions. Such actions we are not able to consciously

have control on them. In terms, man does such actions not deliberately and does not will freely to

perform them.

All actions done by infants are under this scope. Others includes, sleep, blinking of the eyes,

sneezing, yawning beside others.

3
NB: Though animals and human perform vegetative or sentient actions in common, for example,

walking, eating, sleeping and growing among others, animals cannot be under the scope of ethics.

Animals lack the actions are uniquely proper to man, that is thinking and willing. Only man can

will and rationalize.

Vegetative or sentient actions done by man can become human acts if and only if, he does them

willingly and knowingly. Putting food in ones’ mouth in a distracted state of the mind is an

act of a man, but to deliberately decide to eat a food is human act.

The Moral Value in Human Acts

Morality has to do with the rightness or wrongness of an action. In other terms, morality is said to

be a quality of human acts. The moral value in human acts, are based on the action that is deliberate.

A morally right action is the one that man does what he is supposed to (ought to do) as well as not

doing what one is not supposed to do (ought not to do).

Any action which we do if ought us to do is morally right as well as any action which we do not

do if ought one not to do is morally right. Doing what you are not supposed to do or not doing

what one is supposed to do is morally wrong.

UNIT THREE: HUMAN CONSCIENCE and BEHAVIOR

Conscience is an inner still voice which enables one to judge his or her actions. In fact, it comes

from a Latin term, conscientia meaning, knowing with. Note that, conscience is not different from

the mind, its one faculty. Thus, conscience is a “practical judgment of reason upon an individual

acts.” One judges actions as good or bad.

4
Kinds of Conscience

Correct conscience: judges what is good as good and what is evil as evil.

Erroneous conscience: judges what is evil as really good and what is good as really evil.

Certain conscience: judges without fear that the opposite of the decision may be true.

Doubtful conscience: it hesitates to make any judgment at all, in fear that the opposite of the

decision may be true.

Scrupulous conscience: it is a very tormenting one. It makes one to remember over and over again

doubts that had already been resolved. It makes one regain a guilt feeling over guilt deeds even

though one may have resolved the issues and forgotten about them. The type of conscience may

lead to individual’s spiritual torture.

Conscience and behavior: Moral formation character

Conscience plays a role towards influencing our behaviors. We already highlighted various kinds

of consciences. We should always obey the right conscience. You should not act or make decision

out of doubt.

i. Conscience influences our capacity to judge issues, so it influences our moral

judgements. Always use the right and certain conscience, which judges things

appropriately.

ii. It influences our behavior through making one to be conscious of an intrinsic law which

he should obey. The voice calls man to do what is right and morally acceptable and

avoid whatever is evil and un called for.

5
iii. Conscience encourages one to speak the truth. In fact, it is on conscience that the voice

of God rests on.

iv. Moral conscience as a voice makes one to feel sorry any wrong doing hence, leading

one to apologize.

v. Conscience facilitates toward our acting and being responsible for our actions.

vi. It enables one to discern his or her actions, rendering them as right or wrong, acceptable

or not.

vii. Though we are free, our consciences give us a sense of making proper use of our

freedom and responsibilities.

viii. It enlightens our moral judgments. A good conscience is truthful and upright. It ought

to formulate good judgments

UNIT 4: ETHICAL SYSTEMS

The various ethical system gives us some possible criteria for determining and judging our

actions. How can we tell if a given act is right or not? We have Teleological theories as well

as deontological theories which try to establish a criterion for determining which actions are

right or wrong.

I. Teleological theories: Teleology theories evaluates actions on the basis of their

consequences.

Teleological Theories are: Hedonism; utilitarianism, stoicism and evolutionism.

a) Hedonism: it is one of the oldest ethical theories. The theory was first formulated by

Aristippus a member of the Cyrenaic school. According to the theory, pleasure is the highest

good. Pleasure originates from a gentle motion. Pain is as a result of rough motion. Pleasures

6
 are of two kinds, intellectual pleasures and sensible pleasures. The former fetches higher

value than the latter. Sense pleasure last only for a moment unlike intellectual pleasures. An

act is good as far as its end product is pleasure.

b) Stoicism: Zeno is recognized to be the father of Stoic school. The ideas of the school were

influenced by Zeno loosing much of his wealth via a ship wreck. The idea of considering virtues

as the only good. According to Zeno, riches, pleasure, health and honors are not goods in any true

sense of the word.

According to Stoic; “everything in the world of reality obeys and must obey inevitable law. Man

has the capacity to know the know using reasoning capacity. Man ought to obey the law. The law

is “live conformably to nature, that is live a consistent life.”

Living by the maxim Zeno says that, “this is man’s happiness, his chief good, the end of his

existence.” The purpose of our lives is therefore, acting in accordance with laws of universal

nature, with the will of the Deity.

Virtue is regarded to be the only good and should be sought for its own sake; it contains all the

conditions of happiness. in fact, virtue is regarded as virtues own reward. There are no degrees in

virtue, who has one virtue has all. some virtues are; fortitude(courage), temperament, justice

and prudence.

7
c. Evolutionism theory: According to Herbert Spencer, one of the evolutionists argues that, “life

is adjustment of internal relations to external relations.” An action (conduct) is good or even bad

as “it well or ill adjusts to its end.” In other terms, an act is good if its adjustment results to a good

end and bad if it results to a bad end. Adjustments results to pleasure, lack of adjustment results to

pain.

“Ancestral experiences of pleasure and pain are transmitted to prosperity through the brain

modifications and accumulated through many generations.” Ethical habits according to Herbert

Spencer are inheritable. In his view we are, imperfectly adjusted hence, we experience a conflict

of egoistic and altruism.

*d. Utilitarianism: The founder of the theory is Jeremy Bentham from England. The theory goes

beyond mere selfish pleasure as conceived by hedonism, to pleasure of the group. According to

Bentham, “pleasure and pain are the only motives governing mankind.” Pleasure as well as pain

for the individual dependent on, the general happiness and prosperity of the whole community.”

In determining a good or a bad act, we have to look at the number of individuals affected. An act

is therefore to be judged on the basis of its utility in promoting the well- being of all. Therefore,

“the greatest happiness for the greatest number.” An action is good if it produces happiness for the

majority.

NB; The theory was later modified and developed further by John Stuart Mill. Pleasure for Mill

differ in quality and quantity. Unlike Bentham, Mill does think pleasure can be calculated

arithmetically.

8
 UNIT. 5: DEONTOLOGICAL THORIES

-Kant center his ethical system on duty. According to Kant man’s last end is the fulfillment of

duty. In his view, good is only found in a good will, hence a good will is one which do not act

from natural inclinations, but rather from duty.

-Only those actions which are done out of duty have moral worth. Those actions done in line of

duty and not from aim of duty, do not have any moral value. Actions in line of duty lack moral

form of morality, hence they lack moral quality. Moral quality of an action is only a product of

respect for the law.

-An action for Kant is not rendered to be good because of the end to which it leads, but solely

because of the motive of duty from which it is done. Moral worth of an action does not lie in the

effects of the action.

-The reason as to why some conducts are to be wrong, is because they treat other persons as means

to an end. Each rational being, each person should be treated not as mere means to an end but as

ends in themselves. We should therefore be moral, because of the dignity and nobility which the

individual possess intrinsically.

The theory of double effects

-It guides one on how to go about in determining when is morally acceptable to executed a given

action to pursue the good, even though the act also has some bad results. The theory is rooted in

medieval natural law tradition by Aquinas.

9
-The theory sates that, “in case where a contemplated action has both good and bad effects, such

an action is permissible only if it is not wrong in itself, and if it does not require that one directly

intend the evil result.”

The theory is essential in situations where one is making a complex case decision, where by you

cannot achieve a given good without having some evil attached out of the action outcome.

Fout issues are to be taken to consideration if an action bearing a double effect is to be permitted.

i. Requires a given criterion outside the evaluation of the effects of the action in order to

determine the moral character of the action to be done.

ii. A clear distinction ought to be made between directly intending a result and merely

foreseeing it.

iii. One should never do evil so that good may come.

iv. By bringing in the notion of proportionality, it undercut the absolutism presupposed by

the first condition.

The theory has become so useful in assisting making decisions on medical ethics, in assisting

making decision on differentiating permissible and impermissible procedures in a range of

obstetrical cases. E.g on medical grounds the life of a baby during delivery can be lost at

expense of saving the mother. That is if the delivery of the child endangers the life of the

mother.

e.g.2.Suppose an expectant woman is found to suffer from cancer of the uterus, if is advisable

to treat her even it means removing the uterus for the sake of rescuing her life, even though

the fetus must die.

UNIT.6: Cultural and Ethical Relativism

10
The ethical relativist says that, there nothing which is absolute. There is no objective morality,

all ethical statement are simply relative. Thus, moral evaluations are subjective, they are relative

and vary from individual to the other.

Objective moral values do not exist and even there is no objective right or wrong. There is no

universal way of judging our actions. There are no universally accepted norms on which we can

use to judge our beliefs on morality.

Each persons’ ethical views vary no one is better than the other, thus you have your ethical

views, I have mine and none is better or more correct than another. We are all true in our views

as long as whatever we are believing in is true.

Cultural relativists, culture is dynamic. There is no culture which is superior than another.

What is right or wrong may vary from individual to another or from one society to another.

There is no society which more -better than or moral than that of other societies. “Thus,

whenever two people or two societies disagree about the morality of an act, both sides are

equally correct.”

Culture is in place as long as humanity is. Culture belongs to a society, its not a property of an

individual. Cultures have values, cultures vary from one society to another.

11