Ganda as an understanding of moral goodness

I. Ganda as an understanding of moral goodness

Ganda encompassing everything that is to be pursued. According to de Mesa and Cacho (2012), “ang maganda,” for the Filipino, is associated with mabuti (good), maayos (order), and totoo/walang daya (truth/guilelessness).

Although, ganda is commonly used as an expression of our aesthetic judgment, we also apply it as our expression of positive ethical judgments. “Ang maganda” characterizes moral actions while the opposite which is “di maganda o ang pangit” denotes immoral actions.

A. Ethical Concept of Ganda

1. Mabuti: Purity of intention

Maganda ang mabuti (beauty in goodness). According to Jocano (2001) buti is the desire of what is good. Hence, we may say maganda ang mabuti. But mabuti alone is not sufficient to be considered maganda.

2. Maayos: Appropriateness of action.

Maganda ang maayos (beauty in orderliness). PCP II (1991) declares that in the core of humanity is the inclination for order. Gusto natin ang maayos at ayaw naman natin ang magulo! But there are instances in our lives where we find ourselves contradictory like St Paul, we do not do what we want and do what we hate (Romans 7:15). 

3. Totoo: Sincerity and consitency of intention and action.

Maganda ang totoo/walang daya (beauty in truth/guilelessness). In Greek, truth is “aletheia” which means the state of not being hidden or the state of being evident. Therefore, truth reveals the actual state of something; it is real, genuine and natural and lacks deceit, pretense or disguise.

Hence, Kagandahang loób is a winsome goodness, ang kabutihang nakabibighani o nakakaakit.

Ethical goodness and aesthetic charm are combined.

That is why Kagandahang-loob is pure positivity that captives and wins people over

(E. Schileebeeckx cited in De Mesa and Cacho, 2012, page 25).

B. Characteristics of Kagandahang loób:

1. Kagandahang loób is an eminently relational concept. It is activates in our relationships with others (kapwa).

   • Kagandahang loób is authentic if it arises from the personal initiative of one acting. It is streams from within (bukal sa loób) and not forced (pilit). Hence, it is a voluntary act (kusa) and not manipulated (minanipula).

   • Kagandahang loób is directed towards the well-being or welfare of the other. It is others-centered and works for common good (para sa kapakanan o ikalalago ng kapwa).

   • Kagandahang loób is not self-seeking and does not look for a “return of the favor.” It is selfless (mapagbigay) and free from greed (kasakiman).It is focused on what welfare it can offer for others and not from what it can gain from them.

   • Kagandahang loób tends to an “excessive” manifestation of goodness and generosity. It is does not stop working for the welfare of others. Whether being recognized or not it continue to pursue common good because it is genuine (dalisay).

   • Kagandahang loób is discerned and proven through experiences over a period of time. It is a gradual process of self-purification which is tested and strengthened by time.

II. Pagsasaloob sa kagandahang-loób: Embracing moral goodness

According to Alejo (1990) “ang pagsasaloób ay katapatan sa katotohanan na tumatalab at umaabot ang tindi sa iba.” He used movie/theater acting skills as an example to elaborate further. He said that excellent actors are those who are able to feel the character (madama ang katauhan) they portray. Although, in movie/theater industry pagsasaloób is a “mere” acting (palabas lang); in real life pagsasaloób is a faithful acting which involves the totality of a person. Acting in reel and real life may not always share the same intention but definitely share the same skills of acting.  Therefore, Pagsasaloób sa kagandahang loób implies that there is maganda (gracious goodness) in everyone (Gen. 1:27). We just need to look within; have a thorough knowledge (kaalaman) and understanding (pang-unawa) of the loób (self).

Several Filipino scholars (Alejo, 1990; Mercado, 1994; de Castro, 1999; Reyes, 2015; & de Leon, 2018) mentioned that Loób is literally translated inside/interior which is use to describe the physical objects like a pot, base or house. But in the Filipino concept, it also refers to a person’s holistic and relational will.

A. Structure of the loób according to Alejo

1. Abot-malay (ambit of conscoiusness) (Lawak)

   • It is the extent of person’s consciousness (kamalayan) which pertains to perception, memory, imagination and  foresight.

   • the structure of the loób where meaning-making is found and continously evolving through active interaction vis a vis the self (malay-sarili), others (malay-kapwa), cosmos (malay-daigdig), and God (malay-Maykapal).

   • empowers a person to be observant and responsive to the needs of his/her surroundings.

   • Abot-dama (ambit of feelings) (Lalim)

     • It refers to the realm of feelings that intensify and impact abot-kamalayan (consciousness).

     • It is not a mere feeling, it is a conscious feeling. It realized in pagsasaloób (internalization), pakikiramay at malasakit (solidarity), pagkasangkot sa bagay (cosmic care), at pangingilabot sa Diyos o May loób sa Diyos (religious experience).

   • Abot-kaya (ambit of strength) (Laman)

     • this comprises pagbubuo ng loob and pangangatawan.

     • Pagbubuo ng loób involves the process of deliberate assessment concerning the unity of abot-malay (consciousness) and abot-dama (feelings). The balance and harmony between the two is the point of departure in performing an act.

III. Pangangatawan ng kagandahang loób: Commitment to be moral

Pangangatawan is literally translated as embodiment. Because it is the tangible representation or expression of something invisible. When attached to the kagandahang loób ng Dios (God’s gracious goodness), “pangangatawan is discipleship” (de Mesa and Cacho, 2012).

In pangangatawan (discipleship), we submit ourselves to the God (1 Corinthians 3:16) and allow our katawan (body) become channel of the kagandahang loób ng Dios (God’s gracious goodness). Hence, we become kinatawan (disciples) of God through Christ. St. Therese of Liseux views herself as the heart of Jesus. She was a cloistered nun, like the heart hidden within the body, but her prayers give life to the Church similar to the heart that helps circulates the blood within the body.

Pangangatawan sa panahon. However, pangangatawan (discipleship), as mentioned by Alejo, encompasses time. It is a gradual and dramatic process of aligning our own will to the will of God through self-purification. We could relate here the Filipino concept of “pagbabalik loob” (conversion). Also, the life of St. Augustine testifies to this reality.

This shows that pangangatawan (discipleship) is an endless faithfulness to God’s kagandahang loób (gracious goodness) which relentlessly lead us to the beautiful unfolding of the self. The more we know and love God, the more we know ourselves. And the more we love God, the more our faith mature. This is the paradox of revelation (CFC). Consequently, this is also the truth revealed by the Theological Virtues: faith, hope, and love (1 Corinthians 13:13). Indeed When love is profound, hope is heightened and faith is strengthened!

Abot-kaya sa pakikibaka at Pag-asa. It speaks about persistent struggle (pakikibaka) to destroy the inner forces (i.e. ignorance, fear, violence, vices) and external forces (i.e. social issues and concerns) that prevent us from attaining kaginhawaan (freedom).

May utang na loób tayo sa Dios (We are indebted to God). Ang kagandahang loób na ipinadama sa natin ng Dios ang nagtutulak sa atin na maipadama ito sa ating kapwa.(The gracious goodness we have encountered from God compel us to demonstrate it to others). Hence, we are determined to develop magandang asal (good character) to free ourselves from the inner forces attacks the propagation of God’s kagandahang loób. In addition, we take risk (sumusugal tayo) as we participate in addresing social issues and concerns to safeguard and promote human dignity, quality of life, and integrity of creation.

According to Pe-Pua and Marcelino (2000), the Filipino understanding of “bahala na” is not fatalism. But a determination and taking risk after doing everything. Hence, it is an attitude that accepts suffering and problem, leaving everything to God. After giving our best effort, we can only hope for the best because there is a God who completes everything.

1. What is Morality and the Principles of Morality?

Moral ( Kalinasang asal),  derived Latin word means “ Mores, meaning customs, habitual ways of doing things. Customary ways of doing can, of course, be either right or wrong, good and evil.

In morality the fundamental value is always the human person and the person in relationship with society. We belong to society and the human community by the very nature of our birth thus, personal morality can never be divorced from our responsibilities as members of that society.

Good and Evil

              Every being alive and being human means that one has purpose, one has goals, one seeks meaning in life.

              One has needs and desires pursuant to keeping oneself alive and seeking one’s own fulfillment.

This fulfillment, or perfection, we call “the good”. Hence, we can sate another fundamental moral truth: Anything contributing to the full actualization of human potential and the proper development of the human person is good or moral.

Human being may be deprived of what they need for their growth and development as persons in different ways.

1. Physical Evil – (pre moral evil) evil bought on by forces normally outside human control, e.g. natural disasters, sickness, or accident.

2. Moral Evil – evil brought on by the free, unjustified action of other humans.

While the above may be helpful distraction, it is not always as clear-cut as it looks. Sometimes what may at first appear to be purely physical evils are in fact the result of culpable human carelessness or negligence – the motorist who does not check his car’s brakes, the meteorologist who through negligence does not accurately predict a hurricane, the careless smoker who causes a fire. What all this reaffirms is that, for the most part, it is the free, unjustified action of human beings that frustrates the legitimate personal needs of other human or, in other words, causes evil.

Most evil is moral evil.

       At this point you may be wondering where all this talk about evil is leading. Your patience is about to be rewarded, for some important considerations follow from the above:

1. Morality has to do with who and what we are human beings and with our legitimate development as persons. It all human persons, whether or not they have made religious person, or express belief in God, to be bound by morality. “Society expects those who have no allegiance to any religion to be responsible for their conduct as are those who do.

2. Authority does not create morality. The church, the government, or anything else in authority cannot arbitrarily declare something to be immoral. Whatever it is must be immoral ( e. g. inflict unjustified pre-moral evil.) in and of itself before it can ( or should) be so declared.

3. Immoral and illegal are not the same thing. Sometimes authorities (whether civil or religious) make laws about things that are not in themselves pre moral evils. Laws like these are made only to help regulate society for everyone’s benefit. Things forbidden by such laws are illegal, but not necessarily immoral.

Driving through a red light may be illegal , but unless there is a danger of pre-moral evil to the public it is not immoral. ( Knox, p.251-254).

Principles of morality

One of the best known principles of ethics is the principle of double effect. It is most often used in the analysis of the moral aspect of controversial human acts, and commonly called upon to evaluate medico-moral problems. It is also known as the voluntary indirect principle. It is also known as the voluntary indirect principle.

The Four Conditions of the Principle of double Effect

              To the question of whether such an action can be morally justified or not, we often answer: It defends, “On what? Traditionally, moral philosophy has always required the presence of four conditions for a valid application of the principle of double effect.

These conditions are as follows:

1. The action itself must be morally good or at least indifferent.

An action which is morally evil is always wrong. A person must never intend to do something which in itself is evil because it is negative principle of natural law. Even if an individual intends to accomplish something good, he/she cannot morally justify the use of evil means. Simply put the principle asserts that a good end does not justify evil means.

1. The good effect must precede the evil effect or at least be simultaneous with it.

It should be noted that this second condition is concerned primarily with the precedence of causality, not the time sequence of the good and the bad effects. The reason for this condition is that under no reason is one justified to do evil in itself. Thus, an action whose primary effect is evil cannot be morally justified, even if through that evil, secondary effect, which is good , follows.

1. The intension of the agent should be directed towards the good effect, never to the evil effect.

The intention of the agent (finis operantis) specifying the morality of the action is mentioned when speaking of the sources of morality. Bothe the mid and will commit themselves towards the intended purpose., the one thing that prompts the performance of the action. If what is intended is something evil, then the action is morally specified as an evil action.

1. Proportionality; the good effect must be more important than or at least equal to bad effect. One must remember that all moral actions are directed towards certain moral goods or values, towards effects or objects that are considered valuable to a person. The individual is enriched with acquisition of that good or value. ( Salibay, p.86-89).

SYNTHESIS:

Ang kagandahang loób ay isinasaloób at pinangangatawanan!