DETERMINANTS OF MORALITY

“BONUM EX INTEGRA
CAUSA MALUM EX
QUOCUMQUE
DEFECTU”

A thing is good if it has the

fullness of its parts and it is
bad when it is deficient in
any of its integral parts.

A human act is good

when it is good in itself,
in its motive or purpose
and in its circumstances.
 DETERMINANTS OF MORALITY

1. THE OBJECT
FINIS OPERIS

THE OBJECT OF THE HUMAN ACT IS THAT EFFECT WHICH AN ACTION

PRIMARILY AND DIRECTLY CAUSES

THE OBJECT CHOSEN IS A GOOD TOWARD WHICH

THE WILL DELIBERATELY DIRECTS ITSELF
 THE OBJECT
FINIS OPERIS

The object of the act is the very substance of the act.

It answers the question "what was performed by the moral agent?”

It does not only say that the agent intentionally killed the man, but it says
the agent murdered the man. Nor does it say that he deprived the owner of
his property, but he stole it.

In other words, the object of the act refers to what was distinctly and
specifically done and hence understood to be appropriate act and not just
understood in general terms. Thus "an object of the act," according to St.
Thomas {S. T., /-//, 18), "is good when it is in conformity with
reason or when it fulfills or fits the demands of reason. Otherwise, the
object of the act is evil."
THE OBJECT
FINIS OPERIS

IT IS ALWAYS AND NECESSARILY

THE RESULT OF THE ACT,
INDEPENDENT OF ANY
CIRCUMSTANCES, OR OF THE
INTENTION OF THE AGENT.

INTRINSIC EVIL - an act which is evil by

its nature.
EXTRINSIC EVIL - an act which in itself is
not evil but is made evil on account of
something else. (drinking liquor in
excess, giving alms as prohibited by law,)
1. The ACT in itself / OBJECT–
The external human act
performed, the deed done.

*If the object is evil, the act is evil,

nothing can make it good.
Where the object of the human
act is morally evil, as in the
case of rape or murder, no
purpose and intention of the
agent -- be it ever so good--
can permit this act.
If the act is good as an object, it
may still be changed by its
circumstances, particularly by the
intention of the agent.
Example may illustrate the
concept of the "object of the act".

Therapy

What is the object of therapy?

The object of therapy is to treat
diseases or relieve pain.

Treating diseases or relieving pain

is in accordance with reason.

This is good inasmuch as therapy is

what medical practice wants to
finally accomplish.
Example to illustrate the concept
of the "object of the act".

ABORTION

CONTRACEPTION

What is the object?

A human act could be good, evil or
indifferent depending on the moral
nature of the act independent of any
law, regulation or order.

An object of the act is good when it is

in conformity with the nature or the
purpose for which it was made.
Otherwise an object is evil
EXAMPLES: Good, Evil, Indifferent
1. compassion for the patient
2. Malpractice
3. eating
4. organ donation
5. procured abortion
6. walking
7. medical mission
8. embryonic stem cell research
9. euthanasia
10. solidarity with the indigent patient
11. advocacy for the weak
12. sleeping
 2. THE END INTENDED BY THE AGENT

FINIS OPERANTIS
THE REASON FOR WHICH THE AGENT UNDERTAKES THE ACT
 This refers to the purpose for
which a human agent does an act.

Humans perform acts to achieve a

purpose, which fortunately or
unfortunately are sometimes
different from the object of the
act itself.

The motive of the agent answers the

question "what specifically does the
agent personally want to
accomplish." The motive therefore
is the factor for which the agent acts
Almsgiving
Treating Patients
Helping
Volunteering
Caring
Almsgiving in which the agent
wants to help a hungry person.
But sometimes the motive is
different from the object of the act.
Thus, if the agent gives alms to a
hungry girl in order to seduce her
makes the act bad,
although almsgiving is good when
the object alone is considered.
The END OF THE AGENT – the purpose or
motive of the doer of the act.

Good act + evil motive = Evil

Evil act + good motive = Evil.

It cannot be made good
 Kinds of Motive
Good motive Bad motive
One which is
consistent One which
with the
dignity of the grows from
human person selfishness
One which is in
accordance Provokes
with virtues of actions that are
truth, justice,
temperance detrimental to
and prudence
others
 THE END OR EFFECT INTENDED BY THE AGENT IN AN ACTION
MAY BE THE SAME AS THE OBJECT OF THE ACTION
IN WHICH CASE, FINIS OPERIS AND FINIS OPERANTIS ARE THE SAME

IN PLACE OF END, THE TERM INTENTION IS ALSO OFTEN USED TO NAME

THE second SOURCE OF MORALITY

INTENTION RESIDES IN THE ACTING SUBJECT

 3. CIRCUMSTANCES

THE PARTICULARS OF THE HUMAN ACT

WHICH ARE NOT NECESSARILY CONNECTED WITH THE HUMAN ACT

BUT WHICH AFFECT THE MORALITY OF THE ACT

circumstances of the human acts refer to events,

occasions or conditions that make the act concrete
They modify acts either by increasing or
diminishing responsibility of the agent.

They either lighten or aggravate the weight of

the moral accountability of the performer.

However, the circumstances of the act do not

change the specific nature of the human act.
KINDS OF CIRCUMSTANCES
WHO, WHAT, WHERE, WHEN, WITH WHAT MEANS, HOW
EXAMPLE

A doctor asking the patient to disrobe to have a

better diagnostic management of a woman's
disease or illness.

Is there something wrong about it?

How can the circumstance aggravate the
situation?
There may be impropriety, if the doctor is
himself the one undressing the woman.

This can be done by the patient herself, or if

not by her relative or guardian.

The doctor will unwittingly open himself to

serious vulnerabilities like sexual harassment
or lustful and improper act and could even be
sent to the courts of law and finally to jail
for such unprofessional actuation.
 The concept of the circumstances plays a
very important role in the management of
patients as they can affect the appropriateness
or inappropriateness of one's behavior with the
patients or medical practice in general.
 KINDS OF CIRCUMSTANCES
WHO, WHAT, WHERE, WHEN, WITH WHAT MEANS, HOW

1. WHAT. This circumstance answers what the intended

object of the act is. Was it procured abortion or just an
indirect abortion secondary to a major surgical act?

2. WHY. It refers to the personal intention that inspired

or led the agent to move to an action. What was the
intention of the mother or the father in seeking
contraceptive procedures performed on her?
 KINDS OF CIRCUMSTANCES
WHO, WHAT, WHERE, WHEN, WITH WHAT MEANS, HOW

3.BY WHAT MEANS. This refers to the various

instruments, tools, or procedures by which an act is done or
performed. It may well be that the intention of the agent is
good, but the use of an unlawful or unethical means render
the act or the intention evil. This truism gives credence to our
moral act, "The end can never justify the means.”

4. HOW. This refers to modes of doing or acting under which

an act was done. Was the act done with freedom or consent, or
was it done under undue force or pressure? Was the act done
with violence, threat, fear, ignorance or some other passions?
 KINDS OF CIRCUMSTANCES
WHO, WHAT, WHERE, WHEN, WITH WHAT MEANS, HOW

5. WHEN. This refers to the time when the act was performed.
When did the felon do it? Was the crime done while people were
doing some religious activities? Was the medical malpractice
performed even when the prohibition to do it was still in effect?

6. WHERE. This refers to the spatial setting in which the act

was done. Was it done in school in front of small children? Was it
perpetrated in a religious place where the sensitivity of people is
culturally and religiously held in high esteem? Was the scandal such
that it can ignite religious war because it was done with flagrant or
gross disrespect against the religious sensitivity of the people or the
sacredness or pride of place
 KINDS OF CIRCUMSTANCES
WHO, WHAT, WHERE, WHEN, WITH WHAT MEANS, HOW

7. WHO. This refers to the person who does or receives the

act.

Persons may hold positions of authority, are superiors or subjects,

doctors or patients, priests or lay, rich or poor

There are VIP's and ordinary ones. They expect therefore to be

treated accordingly. This is the reason for the level of the
variation of moral responsibility among individual persons.
EXAMPLE there is a difference in the moral responsibility
between mere homicide and parricide or suicide.

A mother who aborts her unborn baby is more responsible

rather than, if she committed homicide against someone who
is not her relative. The late Pope John Paul II even
considered abortion as an "unspeakable crime."
EXAMPLE

Suppose an old, poor widow has one hundred pesos, the only
money that she has to purchase medicines necessary for her to
live for the next few days.

Now, Mr. Bill Gates has one hundred thousand dollars.

A thief steals both the money of the old, poor widow and
that of Mr. Gates.

Which of the two acts of theft is graver --- the one stolen
from the poor, old widow or that of Mr. Gates?
Obviously, the one stolen from the old, poor widow!

Even if that amount stolen from Mr. Gates is much

bigger, it pales in comparison from that of the one hundred
pesos of the poor, old widow.

This is where the circumstances of WHO makes a

significant difference in agent's moral responsibility.

One has to consider very well the status or the condition of the
person who or to whom the act is done. For indeed, there is
logical reason why we consider the person, as the moral
sensitivity changes accordingly in the assessment of moral
responsibility.
 CIRCUMSTANCES CAN INFLUENCE THE MORALITY OF AN ACT

IN THE POSITIVE SENSE

A CIRCUMSTANCE CAN MAKE BETTER AN ACT GOOD IN ITS OBJECT
A CIRCUMSTANCE CAN MAKE GOOD AN INDIFFERENT ACT IN ITSELF

IN THE NEGATIVE SENSE

A CIRCUMSTANCE CAN MAKE WORSE AN ACT EVIL IN ITS OBJECT
A CRCUMSTANCE CAN MAKE EVIL AN ACT INDIFFERENT IN ITSELF
CIRCUMSTANCES contribute
to increasing or diminishing
the moral goodness or evil of
human acts.
They can also diminish or
increase the agent’s
responsibility.
BUT, they cannot change the
moral quality of acts. They
cannot make neither good
nor right an action that is in
itself evil.
 Moral Principles on the
MOTIVE of the Agent

(a) A GOOD ACTION DONE ON ACCOUNT

OF A GOOD MOTIVE IS A DOUBLY GOOD
ACT
 Moral Principles on the
MOTIVE of the Agent

(b) AN EVIL ACT WHICH IS DONE ON

ACCOUNT OF AN EVIL MOTIVE BECOMES
DOUBLY EVIL (GRIEVOUSLY WRONG)
 Moral Principles on the
MOTIVE of the Agent

(c) A GOOD ACTION DONE ON ACCOUNT

OF AN EVIL MOTIVE BECOMES EVIL.
 Moral Principles on the
MOTIVE of the Agent

(d) An evil act which is done for a good

motive does mot become good.
 Moral Principles on the
MOTIVE of the Agent

(e) An indifferent act may either become

good or bad depending on the end.
 PRINCIPLES governing the
CIRCUMSTANCES of the Act

1) An indifferent act becomes good or evil by

reason of its circumstance

2) A good act may become evil by reason of

circumstance

3) A good or evil act may become better or

worse by reason of the circumstance
 PRINCIPLES governing the
CIRCUMSTANCES of the Act
4) An evil act can never be made good by
circumstance

5) A circumstance which is gravely evil

destroys the entire goodness of an objectively
good act

6) A circumstance which is evil but not

gravely so does not entirely destroy the
goodness of an objectively good act.
 Some points to consider in
the circumstance of the act
a) The moron, the insane, the senile, and the children below
the age of reason are considered incapable of voluntary
acts and therefore are exempted from moral
accountability.

But actions against these persons are normally regarded

most cruel due to their helplessness in defending
themselves

b) Persons with higher educational attainment are

presumed to know “better” than those with little education.
Accordingly, their liability is higher. Indeed, “to whom
much is given, much is expected.”
c) Persons vested with authority have higher
accountability than those who merely follow
their order or command. This is the meaning of
“command responsibility” which makes a
superior or official accountable for the actuation
of those under their authority.

d) The relationship between people involved

in act may modify the nature of such act.

In this sense, adultery is different from fornication,

and parricide from homicide
EFFECT OF THE CIRCUMSTANCE TO
THE ACT
1) Circumstances may either increase or
decrease the wrongfulness of an evil act

2) Circumstances also may either increase

or decrease the merits of a good act

3) Some circumstances may alter the

nature of an act
Research Paper

Critique of an article (in a journal or a section, or

chapter of a book) on a moral topic (e.g. freedom,
conscience, law, virtue, moral act, or sin)

Create a Title Page:

Deadline: WEDNESDAY before the PRELIMS

Times New Roman, 12 Font size, Double Space, One

inch Margin for all sides, Short Bond Paper, 2-3
pages. Attach the copy of the article.