Category: ETHICS

Posted on

What is Consequentialism?

Consequentialism is a moral theory that evaluates the moral worth of an action based on its consequences. In other words, consequentialists believe that the rightness or wrongness of an action is determined solely by its outcomes, rather than the intentions or motives behind the action. The term “consequentialism” comes from the fact that the theory places great emphasis on the consequences or outcomes of an action.

There are several different variations of consequentialism, but the most prominent is utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory that holds that the moral worth of an action is determined by the amount of overall happiness or pleasure it produces for all affected parties. According to utilitarianism, the right action is the one that maximizes overall happiness or pleasure and minimizes overall pain or suffering.

Utilitarianism has been championed by many famous philosophers, including Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. Bentham famously argued that “the greatest happiness of the greatest number is the foundation of morals and legislation.” In other words, he believed that the goal of morality should be to maximize overall happiness for the greatest number of people.

One of the main advantages of consequentialism is its simplicity. Consequentialism provides a clear and straightforward way to evaluate the morality of an action: simply assess its outcomes. This makes consequentialism an attractive theory for those who value clarity and objectivity in their moral reasoning.

However, there are also several criticisms of consequentialism. One of the main criticisms is that consequentialism is too focused on outcomes and neglects the importance of intentions and motives. Critics argue that the intentions behind an action are just as important, if not more important, than its outcomes. For example, lying to someone in order to spare their feelings might have a positive outcome (they are not hurt), but it might also be morally wrong because it involves deceit and manipulation.

Another criticism of consequentialism is that it can lead to the violation of individual rights and liberties. If the goal of morality is to maximize overall happiness, then it might be justifiable to sacrifice the happiness of a few individuals for the greater good of the majority. For example, utilitarianism might justify the use of torture or other forms of coercion in order to extract information that could prevent a terrorist attack.

Critics argue that this is a violation of individual rights and that consequentialism fails to provide adequate protection for minority groups or individuals who might be harmed by the majority’s pursuit of happiness.

In addition to these criticisms, there are also practical challenges to consequentialism. It can be difficult to predict the outcomes of an action, and it can be even more difficult to determine how much happiness or suffering is produced by those outcomes. This makes it challenging to apply consequentialism in real-world situations, where there are often competing interests and unpredictable outcomes.

Despite these challenges, consequentialism remains an influential moral theory that has shaped the way we think about morality and ethics. Many modern moral theories, such as virtue ethics and care ethics, incorporate elements of consequentialism while also addressing some of its criticisms and limitations.

In conclusion, consequentialism is a moral theory that evaluates the moral worth of an action based on its outcomes. Utilitarianism, a variation of consequentialism, holds that the right action is the one that maximizes overall happiness or pleasure and minimizes overall pain or suffering. While consequentialism provides a clear and straightforward way to evaluate the morality of an action, it also faces several criticisms, including its neglect of intentions and motives and its potential for violating individual rights and liberties. Despite these challenges, consequentialism remains an influential theory that has shaped the way we think about morality and ethics.

Posted on

What is Intentionality?

Intentionality is a concept that has been discussed and debated by philosophers for centuries. It refers to the property of being directed towards something, or having an object. In other words, it is the feature of a mental state that makes it about something.

One of the most influential philosophers in the field of intentionality is Franz Brentano. He argued that all mental states are intentional, and that they are always directed towards an object. According to Brentano, the mental act of thinking, for example, always involves thinking about something. This is what sets it apart from other physical acts, which do not necessarily have an object.

One way to understand intentionality is to think about it in terms of beliefs and desires. Beliefs are mental states that are about something, such as the belief that the earth is round. Desires, on the other hand, are directed towards some future state of affairs, such as the desire to become wealthy. Both beliefs and desires have objects, and are therefore intentional.

Another way to understand intentionality is to think about it in terms of representation. Mental states are often said to represent the world, in the sense that they provide us with a picture or model of reality. For example, when we think about a tree, our mental state represents the tree in some way. This is what gives our mental state its intentional character.

Intentionality is closely related to the concept of meaning. In fact, some philosophers use the terms interchangeably. When we say that a mental state has intentionality, we are saying that it has meaning. This is because the object towards which the mental state is directed is typically something that has meaning or significance for us.

There are several different types of intentionality that have been identified by philosophers. These include:

  1. Singular intentionality: This refers to mental states that are directed towards a particular object. For example, the belief that my car is parked outside.
  2. General intentionality: This refers to mental states that are directed towards a class of objects. For example, the belief that all cars have four wheels.
  3. Collective intentionality: This refers to mental states that are shared by a group of individuals. For example, the belief that democracy is a good form of government.
  4. Emotional intentionality: This refers to mental states that are directed towards our emotional experiences. For example, the feeling of sadness that we experience when we think about a loved one who has passed away.

There are also different theories of intentionality that have been developed over the years. One of the most influential is the representational theory of mind, which holds that mental states are essentially representational in nature. Another theory is the causal theory of intentionality, which holds that mental states are intentional in virtue of their causal relations to the world.

In conclusion, intentionality is a complex and multifaceted concept that has been the subject of much philosophical inquiry. It is the property of a mental state that makes it about something, or directed towards an object. Understanding intentionality is essential for understanding the nature of mental states and the way we interact with the world around us.

Posted on

What is Freedom?

Freedom is a concept that has been discussed and debated for centuries, and there are many different definitions and interpretations of what it means. At its core, however, freedom is about having the ability to act and make choices without interference or coercion from external forces.

One of the most fundamental aspects of freedom is the idea of personal autonomy. This means that individuals have the right to make decisions about their own lives and pursue their own goals and interests, as long as they are not harming others or infringing on their rights. This includes the ability to express oneself freely, to worship or not worship as one chooses, to associate with whomever one wishes, and to pursue any lawful occupation or activity.

Another key element of freedom is the concept of political liberty, which refers to the right of individuals to participate in the governance of their communities and countries. This includes the right to vote and to have a say in the decisions that affect one’s life, as well as the right to participate in protests and other forms of political activism.

Freedom also encompasses economic liberty, which means that individuals have the right to engage in trade and commerce and to pursue economic opportunities without undue interference from the government or other entities. This includes the ability to own property, to start and run businesses, and to engage in contracts and other economic activities.

One important aspect of freedom that is often overlooked is the concept of social freedom, which refers to the ability of individuals to live their lives without discrimination or prejudice based on their race, gender, sexual orientation, or other personal characteristics. This includes the right to marry and form families, to have access to education and healthcare, and to participate fully in the social and cultural life of one’s community.

However, it is important to note that freedom is not an absolute concept. In any society, there are limits on individual freedom in order to protect the rights and freedoms of others. For example, while individuals have the right to free speech, this right does not extend to hate speech or speech that incites violence. Similarly, while individuals have the right to own and use firearms, this right is subject to reasonable regulation in order to protect public safety.

Overall, freedom is a complex and multifaceted concept that is essential to the functioning of any democratic society. It is the foundation of individual rights and liberties, and it is essential for ensuring that people are able to live their lives in dignity and with respect for their own values and beliefs.

Posted on

What is Moral Luck?

Moral luck is a philosophical concept that explores the relationship between moral judgment and factors outside an individual’s control. The idea of moral luck highlights the fact that individuals can be held morally responsible for outcomes they did not intentionally cause, and that factors outside of their control can influence how they are judged by society.

The concept of moral luck was introduced by philosopher Bernard Williams in the late 20th century. Williams argued that moral responsibility is not only determined by an individual’s intentions and actions but also by external factors such as luck, chance, and circumstances.

There are four types of moral luck:

  1. Resultant Luck – This refers to the moral judgment that is based on the outcome of an action, which is often influenced by factors beyond an individual’s control. For example, a surgeon may be considered a hero for successfully saving a patient’s life, while another surgeon who performs the same procedure but loses the patient may be criticized, despite both doctors having made the same effort and using the same skillset.
  2. Circumstantial Luck – This refers to the moral judgment that is based on an individual’s circumstances. For example, a person born into a wealthy family may be considered successful and hardworking, while a person born into poverty may be considered a failure, even if they work just as hard.
  3. Constitutive Luck – This refers to the moral judgment that is based on an individual’s innate abilities, talents, and characteristics. For example, a person who is naturally intelligent may be praised for their achievements, while a person who struggles academically due to a learning disability may be viewed as lazy or unmotivated.
  4. Causal luck refers to the outcomes or events in one’s life that are influenced by factors outside of their control, such as chance or external circumstances. It is a type of luck that is not directly attributable to an individual’s actions or choices, but rather the result of a combination of factors beyond their control.
Posted on

What is Moral Responsibility?

Moral responsibility refers to the idea that individuals are accountable for their actions, and they have a duty to consider the moral implications of those actions. In other words, moral responsibility entails the idea that individuals must be held responsible for the consequences of their choices and actions, especially in situations where those choices have a significant impact on others.

At its core, moral responsibility is based on the concept of morality, which refers to a system of beliefs about what is right and wrong. The moral framework of an individual is shaped by various factors such as cultural norms, personal experiences, and upbringing. However, despite these variations, certain moral principles are universally accepted, such as honesty, respect, and compassion. These principles serve as a guide for individuals to make ethical decisions and act in ways that align with their values.

Moral responsibility is often viewed as a crucial component of a just society. In a just society, individuals are expected to take responsibility for their actions, and if they fail to do so, they may be held accountable by the legal system. For example, if a person commits a crime, they are subject to legal consequences such as imprisonment or fines. Similarly, in the workplace, employees are expected to act with integrity, and if they engage in unethical behavior, they may face disciplinary action or termination.

However, moral responsibility extends beyond the legal system and workplace. It also encompasses social and environmental responsibility. In today’s world, individuals are increasingly aware of the impact of their actions on the planet and society. As a result, individuals are expected to act in ways that minimize harm to the environment and society. For example, individuals are encouraged to reduce their carbon footprint by conserving energy, recycling, and using public transportation.

Moreover, moral responsibility also involves taking responsibility for the consequences of our actions on other individuals. This means that individuals should act with empathy and compassion towards others, especially those who are vulnerable or marginalized. For example, individuals may choose to volunteer their time and resources to support social causes such as poverty alleviation, education, and healthcare.

In conclusion, moral responsibility is a fundamental concept that underpins our social and legal systems. It emphasizes the importance of acting with integrity, taking responsibility for our actions, and considering the impact of our choices on others. As such, individuals must strive to act in ways that align with their values and principles and contribute to a just and compassionate society.

Posted on

Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development

Kohlberg’s stages of moral development is a theory that describes how individuals develop their understanding of morality over time. The theory consists of three levels, each of which has two stages. In this essay, we will explore each of these levels and stages in more detail.

Level 1: Pre-Conventional Morality

The pre-conventional level is the first level of Kohlberg’s stages of moral development, and it is typically observed in young children. At this level, individuals are focused on avoiding punishment and seeking rewards. Their moral reasoning is based on their own self-interest and personal needs.

Stage 1: Obedience and Punishment Orientation

At the first stage of the pre-conventional level, individuals view rules and authority as absolute. They obey rules to avoid punishment, and they believe that those who break rules should be punished. They are not able to take into account the needs or feelings of others.

Stage 2: Individualism and Exchange Orientation

At the second stage of the pre-conventional level, individuals begin to consider the needs and desires of others. They understand that others have their own self-interests and may engage in exchanges to meet their needs. For example, a child may share her toys with a friend in exchange for the friend sharing their toys in return.

Level 2: Conventional Morality

The second level of Kohlberg’s stages of moral development is the conventional level. At this level, individuals are focused on maintaining social order and conforming to societal norms. They are concerned with being a “good” person and following the expectations of others.

Stage 3: Interpersonal Relationships Orientation

At the third stage of the conventional level, individuals are focused on being perceived as a good person by others. They are motivated by a desire to maintain positive relationships with others and to be seen as kind, helpful, and cooperative. They conform to societal norms to fit in and be accepted by others.

Stage 4: Maintaining Social Order Orientation

At the fourth stage of the conventional level, individuals understand the importance of following the laws and rules of society. They believe that laws are necessary for maintaining social order, and they feel a duty to obey them. They are concerned with upholding the social order and maintaining the status quo.

Level 3: Post-Conventional Morality

The post-conventional level is the third and final level of Kohlberg’s stages of moral development. At this level, individuals are capable of thinking beyond the expectations of society and are willing to challenge social norms and conventions to uphold their own ethical principles.

Stage 5: Social Contract and Individual Rights Orientation

At the fifth stage of the post-conventional level, individuals recognize that laws and social norms are created by people and are subject to change. They believe that rules should be based on the mutual benefit of all members of society and that there are times when it may be necessary to challenge unjust laws. They are willing to weigh the interests of different groups and make decisions based on what is fair and just.

Stage 6: Universal Ethical Principles Orientation

At the sixth and final stage of the post-conventional level, individuals develop a sense of personal ethical principles that are independent of society’s rules and norms. They believe in the inherent value of all individuals and the importance of upholding human rights and dignity. They are willing to stand up for their beliefs and principles, even if it means going against social norms and expectations.

Critiques of Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development

Despite its widespread influence, Kohlberg’s stages of moral development has faced criticism from various perspectives. Some of the critiques are as follows:

Cultural Bias: One of the primary critiques of Kohlberg’s theory is that it is heavily influenced by Western cultural values and may not be applicable to people from different cultural backgrounds. The stages were developed based on research with Western participants, and critics argue that the stages may not be relevant or accurate for individuals from other cultures.

1. Gender Bias: Another critique of Kohlberg’s theory is that it is biased towards males. Kohlberg’s research was conducted primarily with male participants, and some studies have found that females tend to score lower on measures of moral reasoning than males. Critics argue that Kohlberg’s stages may not accurately reflect the moral development of females and other marginalized groups.

2. Limited Scope: Kohlberg’s theory focuses primarily on moral reasoning and does not consider other factors that may influence moral development, such as emotions, empathy, and socialization. Critics argue that the theory provides an incomplete picture of moral development and may not fully capture the complexities of moral decision-making.

3. Lack of Empirical Support: Some researchers have found that Kohlberg’s stages of moral development do not consistently predict moral behavior in real-world situations. This has led some to question the validity of the theory and its ability to accurately measure moral development.

4. Hierarchy of Stages: Critics have also raised concerns about the hierarchical nature of Kohlberg’s stages, which suggests that individuals must progress through each stage in a linear fashion. Some argue that this oversimplifies the complexities of moral development and may not accurately reflect the way that individuals actually develop their moral reasoning.

5. Lack of Diversity: Kohlberg’s theory primarily focuses on the development of moral reasoning in white, middle-class males. Critics argue that the theory may not be representative of the experiences of individuals from different socioeconomic backgrounds, races, and ethnicities.

In response to these critiques, some researchers have attempted to expand on Kohlberg’s theory to address some of the limitations. For example, Carol Gilligan’s theory of moral development focuses on the development of care and empathy, which she argues is a key component of moral reasoning that is often overlooked by Kohlberg’s theory. Additionally, some researchers have suggested that the stages of moral development may not be hierarchical and that individuals may move back and forth between stages depending on the context and situation.

Despite these critiques, Kohlberg’s stages of moral development remains a significant and influential theory in the field of psychology. It has provided a framework for understanding how individuals develop their understanding of morality over time, and it has helped to stimulate further research and discussion on the topic of moral development.

Posted on

Morality Defined

In these notes, I will clearly distinguish morality from ethics by explaining the meaning, nature, and dynamics of morality. Hence, these notes will briefly address the question “What is morality?”.

It must be noted, however, that the difference between ethics and morality is not that significant. In fact, the former is essentially synonymous with the latter. Etymologically speaking, ethics comes from the Greek word ethos, while morality from the Latin word mos (or mores, if it’s used in a plural form), both words referring to customary behavior. For this reason, we may use the word “immoral” in lieu of the word “unethical”, or we may use the word “moral” instead of the word “ethical”. This is the reason why we say that a “moral person” or “ethical person” is one who is good and does the right thing, and an “immoral person” or “unethical person” is one who is bad and does what is wrong.

As we can see, the terms ethics and morality can be used interchangeably. However, there is a fine line that divides the two. In other words, we can distinguish one from the other in some respects.

The first idea that came to our mind when we ask the difference between morality and ethics is that the latter generally refers to the systematic study of the rightness and wrongness of a human action, while the former is generally understood as the rightness or wrongness of a human action. In this way, we can say that ethics is the specific branch of philosophy that studies the morality (that is, the rightness or wrongness) of a human act. With this, we may initially conclude that ethics is the science of “morals”, while morality is the practice of ethics.

Based on the above initial discussion on the difference between the two terms, we can now draw the idea that ethics attempts to provide systems of moral principles and the reasons why these principles are valid. Hence, ethics is more concerned with theories that can be used to explain why a particular moral principle is valid or not, right or wrong. It is for this reason that ethicists have come up with some of the basic ethical principles that may help determine the rightness or wrongness of a human action. 

Some of these basic ethical principles are: 1) Respect for persons, 2) Truthfulness and Confidentiality, 3) Autonomy and Informed Consent, 4) Beneficence, 5) Non-maleficence, and 6) Justice.


Now, as already mentioned, morality refers to principles of right and wrong behavior or rightness and wrongness (that is, goodness and badness) of human actions. And more importantly, in determining the rightness or wrongness of human actions, the moral agent is guided by the broader rules or principles of ethics. For instance, the person’s moral belief that killing is wrong may stem from the basic ethical principle of “Respect for persons” or “Non-maleficence”. Indeed, this example further explains the basic difference between ethics and morals: if ethics says that killing is wrong because it violates the basic ethical principles of “Respect for persons” or “Non-maleficence”, morality, on the other hand, says “Do not kill” because it is wrong. Again, this is the reason why ethics is understood as the science of morals, while morality is the practice of (the basic principles of) ethics.

Posted on

What is Bioethics? Meaning and Key Concepts

Bioethics comes from the Greek words bios, which means “life”, and ethos, which originally means “custom”. On the one hand, ethics is a branch of philosophy that studies the rightness or wrongness of human actions. On the other hand, bioethics is the application of the principles of ethics to the field of medicine and healthcare. Broadly construed, bioethics, as applied ethics, is defined as the ethics of life.

In particular, bioethics is concerned with the ethical issues that arise from the emergence and development in the life sciences, such as biotechnology and medicine. Some of these ethical issues include euthanasia, abortion, suicide, human cloning, allocation of healthcare resources, genetic engineering, artificial insemination, contraception, and organ donation and transplantation. As we can see, bioethicists address the morality of these ethical issues using appropriate ethical theories, such as utilitarian ethics, Kantian ethics, Christian ethics, and Pragmatic ethics. For example, a bioethicist may argue that abortion is immoral because, using Kantian ethics, it treats the human person as a means rather than as an end.

Core Bioethical Principles

As an applied ethics, bioethics applies the principles of ethics to the field of medicine and healthcare. Some of these principles are stewardship, totality, solidarity, respect for persons, non-maleficence, beneficence, justice, and autonomy.

Stewardship is a principle in Christian ethics that suggests that human life comes from God, and no individual is the master of her own body. Humans are only viewed as stewards or caretakers, having the responsibility of protecting and cultivating spiritual and bodily functions. Thus, as stewards, humans should not harm but rather improve and care for their bodies.

Totality refers to the whole body. This means that every person has the duty to develop, use, care for, and preserve all her bodily parts. However, this ethical principle suggests that an individual has the right to cut off or mutilate any defective or worn out parts of the body.

Solidarity suggests being one with the other. In the healthcare profession, healthcare professionals should be one with their patients or clients. As we can see, the principle of solidarity is very important in dealing with the poor, the uneducated, the disadvantaged, and the marginalized.

Respect for persons means that every person has the responsibility to treat persons always as an end and never as a means. Respect for persons, therefore, is the recognition of the equality possessed by every human being as a unique, worthy, rational, self-determining creature, and having the capacity to decide what is best for him. Respect for persons is best practiced in the principle of free and informed consent.

Non-maleficence is the non-infliction of evil, harm, or injury to others and, of course, to one’s self.

Beneficence is the practice of doing acts of goodness, kindness, and charity.

Justice is the act of giving one what she deserves or what is due to her. For example, X has a right to his due. Hence, Y has the obligation not to deprive X of his due.

Autonomy is the right of every person to have control over their lives and decisions regarding their care. This principle has become the basis of informed consent which has become a core concept in modern medical practice.

Personhood and Bioethics

As a healthcare professional, one must care for human persons in a scientific way. But for one to be able to practicably do this, one must understand the meaning of personhood.

In essence, every human person has an inner worth and inherent dignity. Every person possesses these characteristics not because of what she has or does but because of what she is: a human person. As a human person, she must, therefore, be respected regardless of the nature of her health problem, social status, competence, a past action, and the like. For this reason, decisions about health must aim at the maximum integrated satisfaction of one’s needs biologically, psychologically, socially, and spiritually.

The Calling of the Healthcare Profession

The healthcare profession is a special calling, a service characterized by a trusting and caring relationship that cannot be measured in monetary terms. Thus, in bioethics, providing healthcare is not a career, like accountancy or engineering, but a vocation more like a healing ministry. For this reason, the relationship between a healthcare provider and a patient is not a contract likened to a seller and a buyer of goods. It is, therefore, a covenant – a trusted caring service between a healthcare giver who offers help and a dependent patient who needs and receives it. The patient trusts that the healthcare provider will be his advocate and will always have the patient’s best interest as his first priority. Furthermore, this trust is characterized by mutual honesty, openness, and understanding, and information that is freely given and exchanged.

The healthcare profession, therefore, is a caring relationship wherein the healthcare provider and the receiver have a sense of oneness, fulfillment, and growth, assisting each other’s importance, uniqueness, complexity, feelings, and needs. Each one helps the other find a voice and be heard so that both may be enriched.

The Patient

As the principle of stewardship suggests, every person has the obligation to care for her own health. Thus, she has the right to seek and receive healthcare. It must be noted, however, that a sick individual becomes a patient only if: 

1) she admits that she is sick, 

2) she can no longer take care of herself, and 

3) so, she asks for help.

Because she is sick and unable to heal herself, a patient is vulnerable. Also, she is often unable to judge or choose the quality of healthcare she needs or receives. Hence, she must be protected against harm and exploitation.

As a patient in need of healthcare, she must be given the best possible care and taught to care for herself. Also, as a patient asking for healthcare she must accept responsibility for her care, cooperate with her healthcare giver by telling the truth and doing her best to follow instructions. She must also give respect, gratitude, and compensation to her healthcare provider.

In all these, the patient always remains a person with dignity and must be treated with respect. Her privacy and autonomy must not be violated.

The Healthcare Provider

When a person chooses to be a healthcare provider, she becomes one committed to healthcare, invested with authority but with corresponding responsibilities to her patients, her profession, and the society. She must, therefore, be a patient advocate, keep the patient’s best interest as her first priority, and be competent both in scientific and interpersonal skills. It is imperative that she appreciates the facts gathered from the history, physical examination and laboratory results as well as the patient’s values regarding what is acceptable to her and how she feels. She must guard against being arrogant and must recognize her limitations and ask for help when and if needed.

As an authority in her profession, she must contribute to knowledge, conduct herself in an ethical professional way and be worthy of being a role model to her younger colleagues. She must maintain and upgrade the standards of her profession.

She must also manifest a social conscience, stand for justice for the poor, make health care available at a reasonable cost, avoid the temptation to exploit or take advantage of the patient, and always care about human values. A good healthcare provider, therefore, needs to be competent in mind and hand, and compassionate in heart, that is, one needs the triumvirate of knowledge, skills, and interpersonal relations.

Posted on

Ethics in Research (Research Ethics)

In these notes, I will discuss the meaning of ethics and its application to research. The notes include discussions on some major ethical principles that guide the conduct of research.

Ethics in research is important as it provides researchers with ethical principles or guidelines for the successful conduct of research. But firs, what is ethics?

Broadly defined, ethics is the morality of a human act. By morality, we mean the “rightness” or “wrongness” of a human act.

Practically speaking, ethics is concerned with what is good for the people and the society as a whole. Thus, ethics really matters because it urges us to do good to others and take responsibility of what we do. As a branch of philosophy that concerns itself with questions of how people ought to act, ethics, therefore, provides rules that govern the society as a whole. This explains why behaving ethically means doing the right thing at the right time.

In research, ethics provides guidelines for the responsible conduct of research. Moreover, ethics allows researchers and scholars to further educate themselves and monitor their activities in the conduct of research so as to ensure a high ethical standard.

It must be noted that aside from the fact that researchers must ensure that research subjects or participants are not placed in harm’s way, they need to be reminded that they have the moral obligation to provide maximum benefits to the participants. This means that researchers need not think only of their own interest why they conduct the research. It is for this reason that researchers must be guided by ethical principles in the conduct of the research to maintain research integrity and avoid research misconduct.

As we can see, there are acceptable and unacceptable conduct of research, especially when humans and animals are involved. Needless to say, research misconduct can lead to dire consequences if ignored. Just consider, for example, the famous Nazi human experimentation. As is well known, the Nazi human experimentation was a series of medical experiments on a large number of concentration camp prisoners, including children, conducted by Nazi Germany.

As is well known, during the Nazi regime in Germany, Nazi medical doctors forced concentration camp prisoners to participate in the experiment. In fact, the prisoners did not willingly volunteer to participate in the experiment and no consent was given for the procedures. As records show, the experiments had resulted in trauma, disfigurement, permanent disability, and death.

Some of the famous experiments that the Nazi medical doctors conducted on the prisoners include sterilization and fertilization experiments, head injury experiments, mustard gas experiments, freezing experiments, malaria experiments, experiments on twins, and bones, muscles and nerve transplantation experiments.

Ethics in Research: Some Ethical Principles that Guide Research

Honesty. Researchers ought to honestly report data and results of the study, including the methods and procedures employed in data-gathering as well as publication status. Thus, researchers should not falsify, fabricate, and misrepresent data and results.

Objectivity. Researchers should uphold objectivity and scientific rigor at all times. Thus, researchers should strive avoid all forms of bias in research, such as bias in experimental design, data analysis and interpretation, peer-review process, grant writing, and other facets of research.

Confidentiality. Researchers should always uphold the principle of confidentiality. One way of effectively doing this is to protect confidential communications, such as papers or grant submitted for publications, patient records, and the like.

Competence. Researchers are supposed to be knowledgeable and experts in their own discipline or field of specialization. In short, researchers should be competent scholars. Thus, they ought to maintain and improve their professional competence and expertise through life-long education and learning. More importantly, they ought to take steps to promote competence in science.

Integrity. Researchers ought to keep their promises and honor agreements, such as agreements with donors and research participants. Thus, researches need to strive for consistency in thought and action.

Legality. Research always has a legal dimension. Thus, researchers ought to obey laws and relevant institutional and governmental policies.

Maturity and Openness. Knowledge is supposed to be free. Hence, researchers must willingly share data, results, ideas, and resources. They must also be open to constructive criticisms and new ideas.

Respect for Intellectual Property. Researchers ought to honor copyrights, patents, and other forms of intellectual property. Thus, they should not use methods, data, and results own by other researchers or scholars without permission or proper acknowledgment. More importantly, researchers should avoid plagiarism at all times.

Responsible Publication. Researchers need to publish in order to advance knowledge and scholarships and not just to advance one’s own career. They also need to avoid wasteful publication, such as publishing in predatory journals, and duplicative publication.

Non-Discrimination. Researchers ought to avoid all forms of discrimination against colleagues and students on the basis of sex, race, ethnicity, and other factors that are related to their scientific competence and integrity. For this reason, researchers ought to respect their colleagues and treat them fairly. Senior researchers also need to help educate, mentor, and advise students. Senior researchers, therefore, have to promote the welfare of their students and allow them to make their own decisions.

Human Subjects Protection. Researchers should respect human dignity, privacy, and autonomy at all times. When conducting research on human subjects, researchers should take precautionary measures to minimize, if not completely avoid, harms and risks. They also need to maximize the benefits that participants may get from the results of the study. For instance, if a researcher discovers a cure for a particular disease through her research on indigenous plants, a reasonable part of the patent should go to the indigenous community or communities where the plants are located.

Animal Care. In recent years, we have what we call “animal rights” thanks to the efforts of animal rights advocates. For this reason, researchers should respect animal rights at all times. As a result, they ought to show utmost care for animals when using them in research. Researchers, therefore, should not conduct unnecessary or poorly designed animal experiments.

Social Responsibility. As already emphasized above, researchers should conduct research not only for the advancement of their career but for the good of society as a whole. Thus, researchers should strive to promote social good and mitigate social harms.

Posted on

Buddhist Ethics and the Noble Eightfold Path

Introduction: Buddhist Ethics

As is well known, the ultimate goal of Buddhism is to attain Nirvana, a Sanskrit word for enlightenment. According to the Buddha, this can be attained through the process of cultivating oneself, which involves the Eight-fold Path (Wallace, 2003). Each stage of the Eight-fold Path that a person has to undergo is founded on moral virtue. Thus, Buddhist ethics is crucial to the attainment of enlightenment as it serves as the underlying principle of the Eight-fold Path. These notes explore very briefly the important role that Buddhist ethics played within Buddhism’s Eight-fold Path. It begins with a discussion on the meaning of Buddhist ethics and the common ethical principles articulated by the Buddha. It then proceeds with a discussion on the stages of the Eight-fold Path and sketches the developmental process involved in each stage. Finally, these notes briefly present the important role that Buddhist ethics played in the Eight-fold Path.

What is Buddhist Ethics?

From the perspective of Western philosophy, the morality of human actions can be determined through the satisfaction of a given set of man-made rules and standards. In the case of Utilitarian ethics, for example, an act is considered morally right if it produces the greatest happiness for a great number of people in society; if it produces more harm than happiness, then an act is considered morally wrong (Smart & Williams, 1973; Albert, Denise & Peterfreund, 1984). In Kantian ethics, an act is considered morally right if the maxim of an act can become a universal law (Lindsay, 1934; Ross, 1954; Beck, 1960). In other words, for Kant, an act is right if everybody agrees with the principle upon which the action is based.

As we can see, the Western model of ethics is founded on arbitrary rules and standards that humans invented for their own utilitarian purpose. For example, abortion is morally wrong in many countries but is right in other countries. In this way, the morality of abortion is entirely a matter of social custom that is useful and acceptable to a particular social context. Buddhist ethics, on the contrary, is not based on man-made rules and standard but rather on permanent laws of nature (Harvey, 2000). Thus, Buddhist ethical values are rooted in nature and the unchanging law of cause and effect. For this reason, the ethical imperatives in Buddhism should not be construed as rules for people to follow, but as guidelines for attaining enlightenment (Harvey, 1990). This is why the Buddha did not prescribe any strict rules by which people are compelled to obey. On the contrary, the Buddha is seen to be helping people understand the nature of existence and at the same time guiding them on how to act ethically for their own happiness and for the benefit of others (Harvey, 1990). The Buddha articulated these guidelines through the five precepts.

The first precept involves the intention of not killing living beings. This does not mean, however, that we are not allowed to kill dangerous insects or slaughter some animals for consumption. What the Buddha wants to convey here is that we need to develop compassion for all living beings, most especially human beings. The second precept is to abstain from stealing. Of course, stealing means not depriving others of what is rightfully theirs. But the Buddha goes beyond the ordinary understanding of the term. Hence, in the second precept, the Buddha wants us to develop a sense of justice and fairness.

The third precept is abstention from sexual misconduct. A caveat must be borne in mind though that the term “sexual” here does not necessarily refer to sexual intercourse but the entirety of the senses. Thus, when we say sexual satisfaction in this context, we mean sensual satisfaction or the satisfaction of the senses. The satisfaction that one gets from eating could then be a concrete example of sexual satisfaction. What this precept suggests is that we should not live in excess, such excessive eating. The fourth precept is to abstain from lying. Here, the Buddha encourages us to be truthful all the time and be kind and gentle when dealing with our fellowmen. This precept also calls us to refrain from speaking falsely and gossiping maliciously. Finally, the fifth precept encourages us to abstain from intoxicants, such as alcohol, tobacco, and illegal drugs. The reason for this is obvious. Because in Buddhism meditation is one of the keys to attaining enlightenment, it is but proper to avoid these intoxicants as they only hamstring the development of rational thinking and self-consciousness needed for mindfulness.

With these precepts, understood as the practical expression of Buddhist ethics, we can now determine what makes morally right and morally wrong in Buddhism. All actions that spring from selfishness, hatred, greed, and ignorance are considered morally wrong, while those that spring from love, kindness, generosity, and wisdom are considered morally right. However, it is important to take note that Buddhist ethics does not speak of right and wrong as these words tend to condemn; rather, it speaks of being ‘skillful’ (kusala) and ‘unskillful’ (akusala) for right and wrong respectively (Harvey, 2000). Indeed, this shows that Buddhist ethics is concerned with practices that tend to help rather than harm the self and other.

Buddhist Ethics and the Eight-fold Path

The Eightfold Path is crucial to Buddhism as it provides the concrete path toward the attainment of enlightenment. As the name suggests, it consists of eight stages of increasing spiritual insights, namely, Right View, Right Intention, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, and Right Concentration. Normally, these are categorized into three, with the first two tend toward the cultivation of wisdom, the next three toward ethical conduct, and the last three toward the development of the mind (Wallace, 2003).

Right View means seeing the world as it is in itself. This is a significant step because understanding the world as it is in itself allows us to know what really life is, which in Buddhism is characterized by suffering, absurdities, and meaninglessness. And for the Buddha, Right View implies the acceptance of life no matter how absurd and meaningless it may have appeared to us. If Right View allows us to affirm life, Right Intention enables us to decide to go on with life despite the difficulties it harbors. Thus, Right Intention encourages us to have a positive attitude in life.

The Buddha viewed Right Speech as an act of abstaining from thoughtless words that cause harm to others, such as lying and malicious gossip. Here, the Buddha wants us to speak with honesty, mindfulness, and loving kindness. Right Action means behaving in such a way that we do not harm any living being. Right Livelihood follows directly from Right Action in the sense that, according to the Buddha, we ought to make a living in a just and peaceful way. For this reason, the Buddha calls us to refrain from having livelihoods that cause harm and destruction to our community, such as dealing with weapons.

Right Effort has something to do with the development of wholesome qualities, such as love, kindness, wisdom, and generosity, as well as the release of unwholesome qualities, such as hatred, anger, and ignorance. Right Mindfulness is the complete awareness of the moment. For the Buddha, Right Mindfulness is to remain focused on things that we desire without becoming attached to them. And lastly, Right Concentration involves the turning of the mind to focus on an object that we desire. This implies the seclusion of the mind from sensual and unskillful qualities.

Each stage in the Eightfold Path supports the next stage, that is, in the process of attaining enlightenment, the cultivation of one stage necessarily leads to the cultivation of the next, and so on. Thus, all the paths interact and support each other in the process of realizing the ultimate goal. Now, it must be emphasized that all of this is made possible through the work of morality as the foundation of the Eightfold Path. This is because in Buddhism, the cultivation of what is wholesome depends entirely on the abstention from committing evil deeds and reprehensible actions. In fact, the Buddhist scriptures reveal that a person cannot proceed to meditation without first of all acquiring moral virtues that can restrain the external expression of defilement, such as greed, hatred, and ignorance (Almond, 2006; Der-lan Yeh, 2006).

Conclusion

The above discussion shows that unlike the Western model of ethics which is founded on arbitrary rules and standards that humans invented for their own utilitarian purpose, Buddhist ethics is rooted in nature and the unchanging law of cause an effect. Thus, the ethical imperatives in Buddhism are not to be construed as rules for people to obey but as guidelines for the attainment of enlightenment. The discussion also shows that the five precepts in Buddhism serve as the basis for determining the rightness or wrongness of a human act. Lastly, given the brief engagement with the meaning of Buddhist ethics and the Eightfold Path, these notes conclude that it is impossible for any person to attain enlightenment without the aid of morality.

error: Content is protected !!