Markus L.

Abiog

2014-03243

BS Pharmacy
1. Moral Judgment
Moral judgment are our judgments on how others must conduct themselves, with the sole
reference being the other people only. It means that when one judges another person, he does not
think it through or try asking himself: What if I was in that kind of situation, would I have done
the same thing or behaved the same way? It is a one-sided judgment that to me appears to be
insensitive and lacks empathy towards the person being judged. An example of which was one
discussed in our subject: In a hostage taking, many viewers readily criticize the shortcomings of
the operation to prevent the situation from getting worse. The sentence Dapat ganito kasi
ginawa nila might already be going inside the viewers heads. But, what if you were in the
same situation, could you have actually handled the pressure of having the life of a person
depend on your decisions. Can you actually apply your earlier moral judgment of the course of
action you suggested? Perhaps not. How about another example with less things on the line, but
basically follows the same concept. I brought some guests into our house for a project-making.
As if a hardwired reaction, my brother shut himself up in our room. Later, our mother was
calling my brother to run a few errands, his reply being pag-alis na lang nila referring to my
guests. I went into the room and scolded him saying, Tumino ka nga Andrei! Now that Ive
realized about the concept of moral judgment, it appears that what Ive done was insensitive on
my part. I could have known sooner that my brother is not the type of person who is comfortable
with strangers, or that he simply does not want to cause any interruptions in project. I did not
think of my action if I was in the same situation, which most likely would be to head in our room
now that I think about it. That lack of reflection in my part is a sign of moral judgment.

2. Moral Decision
Earlier, moral judgment was defined as judgment with only other people as reference. From
this definition, moral decision is moral judgment but with the additional reference of the judgers
own actions. In this sense, it removes the lack of empathy of moral judgment by taking into
account of ones own decisions and actions in the same situation. From our discussion, I
analogized that a choice, which reflects ones own preferences, is to moral judgment while a
decision, which entails an actual intent to do a choice in the future, is, obviously, to moral
decision. If you saw something worth doing, thinking to oneself I could have done better or I
suggest that and putting what you preach into practice knowing that you are capable of doing
so; to me, that is moral decision, since you gave your preference of the action, merely
referencing what is being judged (moral judgment), but knowing in yourself that you can do it
and will do it is moral decision. An example, albeit only demonstrating the concept and not the
moral aspect, is teaching someone to do something, lets say solving a math problem. There are
many possible ways of answering a math problem, but when someone teaches how to solve one,
usually the best method of solving is suggested and taught by the teacher, the teacher aware
that he can solve it. In the same sense, moral decision, although it judges and evaluates another
persons actions, somewhat gives proof, a self-reflection in a sense, to these judgments by having
the ability to perform them, much like how a teacher teaches the best way of solving a math
problem.

3. Intellectual Choice
In our discussion, intellectual choice was defined as a normative response: a choice that goes
with what is morally acceptable. The thing that Ive observed is that such choice is very

dependent on what a certain society accepts as a norm: a cultures norm might not be the same
for another. An example that I could give relating to intellectual choice is divorce. Our Filipino
society is well-known for its fervent Catholic faith: so fervent, in fact, that many moral and
social norms are dictated by it. Divorce in our country is not allowed at the moment since there is
a high possibility that the State and Church will have a rift on deciding its validity and
effectiveness in fixing unhappy marriages. Another topic that might as well be debated on by
the two sides (State and Church) is death penalty. Catholic doctrine and humanitarian groups
vehemently disagree with such idea, since it disregards the dignity of human life. In our world
filled with crime and violence, is such a method of serving justice really that inapplicable?
Why or why not? That is what the next type of choice aims to answer.

4. Practical Choice
In contrast to what intellectual choice is, practical choice in a way disregards what society
dictates as a norm, but is concerned with what the person himself thinks is appropriate in the
given situation. It does not bind itself with what other people might think of that choice, but with
what choice will do the better good for the person. If you apply the earlier discussed issues and
put a practical perspective to it, one must neglect the cultures and norms that might be
considered in deciding on these issues: in our example specifically how the Church views these
issues, since they are heavily biased with what doctrine states. If one will talk about divorce
practically, one might say that it will fix broken marriages by completely separating them. If
one side of the marriage is somewhat mistreated or abused by the other, wouldnt divorce sound
like a completely promising idea? For death penalty meanwhile, wouldnt doing so cause fear
among criminals not wanting to suffer the same fate, thereby possibly reducing the amount of

crime in our country? It does not concern itself with morals, provided that it is capable of
achieving its intended purpose.