Metaethics, Normative, and Applied Ethics: A Reflection

The moral arc of the universe bends at the elbow of justice. Martin Luther King, Jr.

The roots of morality can be traced back to the ancient civilization. The human person
had started to learn to pay self-respect through clothing and manners, and had gradually inclined
to setting rules and rituals in consensus with all those who are considered members. Since by
nature we seek for approval and constant appreciation in everything that we do, it became a
necessity to also acknowledge, as one community, an invisible higher authority which is vested
with the power to delineate right from wrong.

As we were so concerned with the origin of man, we are also particular with knowing the
sources of our moral standards. When we say Metaethics, it is the source of ethical principles as
well as their meaning. It is a more outward general view of what is right or wrong. Such source
may be external or internal, meaning; there is a question of where exactly these ethical
principles stemmed from. In connection, issues such as metaphysics and psychology arise and
both deal with the different faces of the coin. Metaphysics deals with the question on whether
morality exists independently of man, while the other questions the psychological basis for
mans moral judgment and conduct.

In metaphysics, the concepts of objectivism and relativism explain much further the
orientation of our ethical principles. Objectivism suggests that our moral values come from God,
and that they are eternal and immutable. Relativism, on one hand, says that these moral values
may also have been formulated by human beings thus making them subjective and relative. The
concept on relativism is further divided into individual and social. An example of individual
relativism is how a person deals with moral issues from his or her personal set of moral
standards. These standards serve as the criteria that guide the individual person in his or her
decisions. Social relativism concerns itself with what is right or wrong depending on what is
agreed upon by a society and not merely by the standards of an individual. Thus, its implications
are manifested in various nations around the world. While some allow same-sex marriage,
others forsake such even by just the thought of it. In the Christian community, marriage is a
sacred vow made by a man and a woman, with God as the ultimate Witness. Allowing same-sex
marriage in a country dominated by the Christian Church would contradict the teachings of the
prophets and saints. It would also bring in conflict and might threaten the foundation of a
Christian family.

As for the psychological bases for human conduct, the concepts of egoism and altruism
explain the motivation for many human behaviors. Psychological egoism supports the view that
self-interests are the primary motives of human behavior and that this is hardwired in all of us. In
relation to economics as a social science, Adam Smith mentioned self-interest as the governing
force which balances out the needs of the society. Take for example a businessman who
envisions himself into becoming a manufacturer of smartphones, and a student who wishes to
acquire a phone for academic and communications purposes. While the businessman targets to
make profits and the student desires to own a new gadget, both are actually helping each other
satisfy their respective interests. Thus, ones self-interest can become an instrument to achieve
anothers. This relationship is beneficial for everyone for as long as no particular individual or
group is ever enriched at the expense of another, most especially at the disadvantage of the
greater public.

Psychological altruism, on the other side, holds that some of our behaviors are motivated
by benevolence or kindness towards others and that this benevolence comes naturally. Meaning,
we choose to give without expecting anything in return. We learn to become selfless. Most of
the time, we associate selflessness with our lifes superheroes. They may take the form of our
parents, close friends, or even strangers. We come across with stories of charity as a personal
pursuit of some individuals or as an organizational-wide initiative as a way of giving back to the
community. Whatever shape selflessness manifests itself, it always comes with a wonderful
heart.

At times, especially during the difficult ones, we experience an interior conflict as to what
we accept or know as right and wrong and as to what we actually choose to do. Knowing what is
right and wrong does not automatically make a person righteous. In the same way that our spirit
desires what is good yet our flesh desires otherwise. Emotion and Reason now come into play.
Reason refers to the use of the intellect and may also refer to the justification of some specific
behavior. It is also the effort to change the mind of another. In reference to this line of thought,
some claim themselves to belong to the Mind-over-Matter category. They believe that feelings
can actually distract us from the issue at hand.

Emotion, at a glance, is defined as a mental state that arises spontaneously as opposed to

something that comes from a conscious effort. It is often accompanied by physiological changes.
In the movie Inside Out, emotions such as joy, sadness, fear, anger, and disgust were shown as
characters that think and manage to know the appropriate time for each of them to come out as
psychological and physiological reactions. Interestingly, at the end, the viewers were given a key
takeaway that the right mix of emotions can affect the choices we make and can go a long way
into our long-term memory.

The concept of Male and Female Morality comes with delineation between a man and a
woman in terms of the way they approach and make decisions. More often than not, society has
a big role in the formation of each type. Moving forward, one of the two researchers that are
vital to the discussion of male and female morality has developed the Moral Development
Theory. It is divided into three levels, namely: Pre-conventional, Conventional, and Post-
conventional. Each level is further subdivided into two stages. Under the pre-conventional level
are the stages of Punishment and Obedience Orientation, and the Instrument and Relativity
Orientation. Conventional level is subdivided into Interpersonal Concordance Orientation, and
Law and Order Orientation. The third level consists of the stages Social Contract Orientation, and
the Universal Ethical Principles Orientation.

Normative ethics involves the search for those ideal moral standards that can regulate
right and wrong conduct. The words should and ought to are usually indicators found in the
statements that prescribe a criterion that is superior. Concepts closely related to normative
ethics are virtue ethics, duty theories, consequentialist theories, and the social contract theory.
To create a whole picture out of the mentioned concepts, imagine a kindergarten class being
taught how to be generous. They are in need of positive reinforcements in order to form a good
habit of wholeheartedly sharing what they have to those who do not have any. When they reach
the age of maturity, they also come to know of their duties to God, to oneself, and to others.
They become individuals who treat others as equals, and now begin to learn to keep ones
promises. At some point, they will be facing circumstances wherein the determinants as to the
rightness or wrongness of their actions are the consequences that occur after. Since the
beginning of their life, they are already bound by the rules set by the society to protect each
members self-interest and to see to it that such rules are being enforced.

Finally, Applied Ethics deals with controversial moral issues. Business ethics is a discipline
which embodies the characteristics of an applied ethics as it deals with the issues found in the
aspects of management, accounting, and finance. Moral reasoning aids in the proper treatment
of ethical issues as the behaviors of individuals, institutions, as well as the established policies
are assessed with applicable moral standards. It is essential for us to know and understand what
the moral standards require, prohibit, value, and condemn in order for us to properly judge
behaviors and policies. We are also warned about the possible fallacies that the arguments we
employ might contain in reaching a result of our assessment. Therefore, it becomes our call to
exercise sound judgment together with the guiding moral standards in resolving ethical issues at
hand.

end of paper