GE9-ETHICS-2-4.pptx-presentation-ppt------

Educational purpose

1. GE9 ETHICS 1 st Week

2. What is Philosophy? What is Philosophy? it is the study of all things in their ultimate causes, acquired by means of reason alone. It came about the when human beings began inquiring about the meaning of life. Etymological meaning: The word “Philosophy” was coined by one of the ancient philosophers, namely Pythagoras (570-496 BCE). It was derived from the 2 Greek words: “ philein ” which means “love of” or “friendship for” and “ sophia ” which means “wisdom”.

3. The objects of Philosophy Material Object All things Formal Object Ultimate Causes Formula Object Human reason

4. The Birthplace of Philosophy It was in the seaport town of Miletus, located across the Aegean sea from Athens, on the western shores of Ionia in Asia Minor.

5. Development of Philosophy Philosophers who are concerned with knowing the nature and the world around them. Thales (624-546 BCE) WATER Anaximander (550 BCE) THE BOUNDLESS Anaximenes (585-528 BCE)AIR Pythagoras (570-497 BCE) NUMBERS Heraclitus (540-480 BCE) FIRE-CHANGE Parmenides (510 BCE) PERMANENT & ONE Empedocles (495-435 BCE) MANY NOT ONE Leucippus (490-430 BCE) & Democritus (460-360 BCE) ATOMIST

6. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF PHILO SOPHY PRESOCRATICS ( NATURE OF THE UNIVERSE) SOCRATICS (PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIETY, POLITICS) MEDIEVAL (GOD CENTERED ERA) RENAISANCE (ARTS&BEAUTY, KNOWLEDGE) MODERN (IDEALISM, EXISTENTIALISM, ESSENTIALISM) CONTEMPORARY (APPLICATION OF THEORIES TO LATEST ISSUES)

7. Branches of Philosophy Epistemology- a branch of philosophy that addresses the philosophical problems surrounding the theory of knowledge. It is concerned with the definition of knowledge and related concepts, the sources and criteria of knowledge, the kinds of knowledge possible and the degree to which each is certain. Metaphysics- a branch of philosophy concerned with the nature of ultimate reality. Aesthetics- a branch of philosophy concerned with the essence of and perception of beauty and ugliness. It also deals with the question of whether such qualities are objectively present in the things they appear to qualify, or whether they exist only in the mind of the individual. Ethics: Standards of Human Conduct Pg.4

8. Branches of Philosophy Cosmology- a branch of philosophy the deals with the study of the universe as a whole, including its distant past and its future. Social and Political Philosophy- a branch of philosophy primarily concerned with the nature of legitimate authority, the nature of society, and the relation between the individual, the community, and the state. Philosophy of Man- it is the study of all aspects of human life and culture. It examines such topics as how people live, what they think, what they produce, and how they interact with their environment. Logic- it is commonly known as the art and sciences of correct thinking. It is a study that deals with the principles of valid reasoning and argument.

9. WHAT IS ETHICS? ETYMOLOGICAL MEANING OF ETHICS From the Greek word ethos, which is translated to English as character , and ethike or doctrine of morality. DEFINITION OF ETHICS It’s defined as the normative philosophical science dealing with the morality of human acts.

10. ETHICS AND MORALITY Ethics provides the principles on the morality of human acts; it equips man with a theoretical knowledge of the morality of human act. Knowing what is Ethics is not a guarantee for the person to become moral or good. Knowing is different from doing. One can only be moral or good when one applies ethics. When one does the theories of Ethics one actually performs the theory, meaning one is actually doing ethics. Morality is therefore a practice of Ethics, applying the theories of Ethics in life. Ethics (theoretical science) provides principles or bases of right or wrong and good or bad actions, morality actualizes the theory.

11. Ethics and Philosophy (Reason) Ethics is Normative Philosophy Ethics and Science (Principles and System) (norms and standards)

12. ETHICS It is the backbone of human existence. It serves as the vertebrate that gives support to the whole life direction of man. Without Ethics there will be a total collapse of the whole human person and the entire human society. It is absolute and immutable; there is only one moral law. (absolute natural moral law)

13. Importance of Ethics To sharpen the moral nature of the learners by inculcating the moral norms. To make them aware of the moral principles and law governing man’s actions. To help the students become aware of the intimate relation between their moral nature and laws. To show to the learners that acting in accordance with his rational and moral nature could lead them to their supernatural destiny- God

14. Importance of Ethics To develop in the students a morality upright living. To let the students realize that people cannot live together harmoniously in society without ethical norms and laws applied or followed.

15. Why do we need to be moral?

16. 3 OF POSTULATES OF ETHICS THE EXISTENCE OF INTELLECT AND FREE WILL THE EXISTENCE OF GOD THE SPIRITUALITY AND THE IMMORTALITY OF THE SOUL

17. The object of Ethics Material Object – the human act Formal Object – morality of human act Formula Object Qou – human reason is employed in the study of Ethics.

18. GE9 ETHICS 2 nd WEEK

19. Who is Man? MAN AND HIS EXISTENCE

20. MAN IS THE ONLY MORAL BEING Man has intellect that separates him from all brute creation. Man has the ability to think before doing a particular action. Man may foresee the consequences of his actions. He has the capacity to know what is right and what is wrong. Morality of human acts cannot be applied to animals for they do not possess intelligence but instinct. Unlike humans, they have the power to acquire knowledge only from experience and from their environment. MAN AS A RATIONAL BEING Man’s actions are in accordance with reason. Every action of his has purpose and meaning. It is the duty of man to be moral. Man as a rational being means his actions are diligently and intelligently made. He carefully examines and analyzes the consequences of his actions. MAN AS AN ANIMAL Similarly, both man and animals possess appetency and knowledge. Animals as similar to man, need also to gratify their instinctive sexual desires. But what separates man from animals is that, man has intellect and free will. The actions of animals lack meaning and are beyond their control and therefore that makes the morality of human acts inapplicable to them. In this we can include imbeciles, morons, idiot, insane, and other psychologically deranged people.

21. VARIOUS NOTIONS OF MAN MAN AS BODY SOUL COMPOSITE. The soul is distinct from the body, and is likened to God in memory, understanding, indivisibility, and immortality. The spiritual soul pre-existed it body. The soul is incarnated in the body. Death liberates the soul from the body. MAN AS A RATIONAL BEING. Man thinks and reasons out. His rationality elevates him from the level of plants and brutes.

22. VARIOUS NOTIONS OF MAN MAN AS EMBODIED SUBJETIVITY Man is not a static entity. He undergoes a continues change. He changes for the better. He grows and develops. The explanation for these changes is the fact that man is a subject, a dynamic actor, or dynamic subject in activity. But this subjectivity is not purely mental or spiritual; it is manifested in a body. The activity is incarnated, or incarnated subjectivity. Man is a dynamic agent or subject that is always actively performing. As a subject-in-activity, he is unique core, center of action, source and spring of activity and meaning.

23. VARIOUS NOTIONS OF MAN MAN IS A BEING IN THIS WORLD Man exists in this world. The human body, is man’s link to his physical world. So there exists an interconnection between the world and the human body. Man gives meaning to the world, and the world get its meaning from the subjectivity of man. To speak of the world is to speak of man, as to speak of man is to speak of the world. In this context, man, therefore, cannot exist without this world; he cannot be separated from it. Man is conscious of the world, thus he is worldly.

24. Various Notions of Man MAN IS SOCIUS AND INTERHUMAN The world is not merely the world of things, but a world of other humans as well. Man lives in the midst of fellowmen. He cannot afford to live alone without the presence of the other people. Because man has the social nature, he seeks the company of other men.

25. VARIOUS NOTIONS OF MAN MAN AS A PERSON He cannot remain to be stagnated. He has to move and climb the social ladder. He has to work out to move from manhood to personhood. “ Madaling maging tao , mahirap magpakatao .” MAN AS AN ABSOLUTE VALUE He cannot be valued in terms of quantity (material, money, etc.) which are of temporary and relative value. In other words, man’s value cannot be quantified or commercialized due to his dignity as human being. Thus, he cannot be monetized or reduced to commodity. His value is absolute and infinite in the sight of his creator and procreator (parents).

26. HUMAN EXISTENCE WHAT IS HUMAN EXISTENCE? HOW SURE IS MAN THAT HE EXISTS? RENE DESCARTES (1596-1650) “METHODICAL DOUBT” First, he doubts. But the act doubting is an effort of the mind. In short, we are indubitably certain that we think. And if we are certain that we think, we are certain of ourselves as thinking beings. This certainty of thought necessitates the certainty of existence of the thinker. Descartes concludes finally that if we think, we exist. He sums this up in the famous formula, COGITO, ERGO SUM, I think therefore I exist.

27. EXISTENTIAL EXPERIENCES OF MAN EXPERIENCE OF THE GOOD Man knows and feels the good. He tends to do good. He is attracted to things that are good. By nature, man is good himself. He is created and procreated good. Just as God the creator and parents who beget him are good. Man does not only experience the good; he himself as being is goodness. EXPERIENCE OF THE BEAUTIFUL Along with the experience of the good is the experience of the beautiful. The good and the beautiful are like blood sisters in that man is attracted to both. Man’s capacity to appreciate is directed toward the beautiful, whether it is a value or an act. It is part of man’s nature to be attracted to it which is normally spontaneous.

28. EXISTENTIAL EXPERIENCE EXPERIENCE OF LOVE Every human creature has the capacity to love; to love himself, to love others, and God. He also feels the need to be loved by other people like his parents, brothers and sisters, friends, et al. Man is a LOVER and a BELOVED. It is love that keeps man alive. It is love that makes him happy. Without love man cannot exist even a single moment. EXPERIENCE OF EXISTENCE The experience of the good, the beautiful, love and happiness are the elements of life, including their respective opposites. Human exitence is the sum of all these experiences. The phenomenon of death is a concept proof of life. For death presupposes life. No one can die without first living. Otherwise, nothing will die.

29. EXISTENTIAL EXPERINCE THE EXPERIENCE OF HAPPINESS Human living would be dry and lonely if the experience of joy and happiness is lacking. If life is all pain, suffering and sorrow, the living person is between living and dying. Happiness is said to be the goal of human living and the crowning point of human existence. Craving for happiness is a natural tendency. To be happy is our innate desire. No human being is without such natural desire. Happiness is what we are striving for in this life. We hate to be unhappy.

30. GE9 ETHICS 3 rd WEEK

31. MAN AND HIS ENDS It is unthinkable for man to exist without a goal in life: an end, a destiny. The only way to give meaning to human existence is to posit a goal, the very reason for being and existence. No act is performed unless there is an objective in view. It is this goal that calls for human activity for human existence. Otherwise, living would be meaningless and absurd if it has no goal or end.

32. What is End? End is the very cause of human acting. End is the very reason why an act is performed, the very reason for its existence. End is both a termination of an act and a goal thereof. End is that which completes an act. It is also that for which an act is performed. It is that which motivates the agent to perform an act to attain it. We do not speak of an end as an edge or limit, or rim of an object, but rather the object of an act. Every activity of man is directed toward and end. The end is the final cause of human activity, which is apprehended as good.

33. THE END OF HUMAN ACT IS GOOD The end is that which is apprehended as desirable. If the end is desirable and attractive to the agent, then it must be good.

34. What is the good? GOOD AS TO UTILITY. An object or acct is perceived as good when it is useful for one’s purpose and satisfaction. GOOD AS TO BEAUTY. We consider an object or act as a thing of beauty when it satisfies our aesthetic appetite. The beauty of a person, physical or social, is synonymous to goodness. GOOD AS TO NATURE OR REALITY. Goodness by nature is real, not accidental. In this context a thing is seen as good, not because of usefulness or aesthetic value, but because it is its nature and reality. In other words, the nature of the object is goodness itself.

35. CLASSIFICATIONS OF END AS END OF THE ACT: The end of the act is that end toward which the act of its own nature is immediately directed. It is the direct object of the act. AS END OF THE AGENT: The end of the agent can be different or the same as the end of the act depending upon the agent. TEMPORAL ENDS, INTERMEDIATE ENDS. When an end is subject to time and place, it is classified as temporal. It is temporal in the sense that it does not last forever, but good only for a certain time. Or it is good only for a certain place or space. These temporal ends are intermediary in that they are used as means to attain other ends. They are means-end. They are not ends per se. Hence, they cannot be the ultimate end. Temporal-intermediary ends , relative in duration, are used for the attainment of the ultimate end.

36. CLASSIFICATION OF ENDS THE ULTIMATE END. The ultimate end is the last and final goal of human act and the human agent. It is called the end of all ends, since this cannot be used to attain any higher end. The ultimate end is absolute and permanent, and can never be converted as means. 2 ASPECTS OF ULTIMATE END SUBJECTIVE ULTIMATE END. This is the aspect of the ultimate end which is the subjective possession of the objective ultimate end by the person. OBJECTIVE ULTIMATE END. This is the aspect of the ultimate end which is inseperable from the subjective ultimate end.

37. SUMMUM BONUM The highest goods of all goods. Happiness is the complete satisfaction of man’s desire. Perfect happiness is man’s last end or ultimate goal. And only when this ultimate end is attained that man’s craving for happiness rests. Can man attain perfect happiness? Man is only human and imperfect. How can imperfect human being attain a thing that is perfect and absolute?

38. Answer: Man can attain perfect happiness. Argument: Man has the desire for perfect happiness. This desire is natural to man. Therefore, this desire is implanted by God in man, then this desire must be fulfilled. Therefore, man can attain perfect happiness which is the fulfillment of such desire. It is absurd to think that God would plant the desire or happiness without the intention to be fulfilled. For this reason, Di Napoli (1961) states that perfect happiness, as summum bonum , must be absolute, permanent, and possible to all men. Perfect happiness must be attainable by people for whom it is intended, no one else.

39. ULTIMATE GOALS CHOSEN BY CERTAIN THINKERS Not all men have the same ultimate goals in life. They vary in their ethical views. As a result, their supreme good (summum bonum ) differ from one another. Common to them, is that all their ultimate ends are to be attained in this world. Mundane in nature, such life’s highest goals are not permanent, everlasting or absolute. They are temporal and, therefore, relative, subject to time and space.

40. Materialistic Ethics It holds that the supreme good of human life are human pleasures and satisfaction. This type is classified into Hedonism and Utilitarianim . Hedonism – it teaches that the highest end of human life is found in sensual pleasures and bodily satisfaction man can enjoy in this world. These include biological, sexual and social pleasures and all kinds of bodily enjoyment. Aristippus of Cyrene (early 4 th century) (“I possess; not possessed”) “ YOLO”

41. UTILITARIANISM - Utilitarianism is a tradition of ethical philosophy that is associated with Jeremy Bentham (1747-1832) and  John Stuart Mill  (1806-1873), two late 18th- and 19th-century British philosophers, economists, and political thinkers. Utilitarianism holds that an action is right if it tends to promote happiness and wrong if it tends to produce sadness, or the reverse of happiness—not just the happiness of the actor but that of everyone affected by it.

42. Ultra-Spiritualism It takes spiritual matters and virtues in this life as the ultimate end of man. Greco-Roman Stoicism. This Ethics takes virtue and abstinence from sensual pleasure as the highest end of man. (Zeno Humanistic Personalism It holds that the ultimate consists of human perfection through knowledge, virtue, honor which must be acquired. Such perfection and fulfillment are the highest value, hence taken as the ultimate end of human life. The attainment and possession of self perfection and contentment would be necessarily result to happiness.

43. Progressive Ethics Ethics of progress takes indefinite progress, material or spiritual, as the ultimate end of man. Aristotle, Greek proponent of this thinking, states that the final goal of man is the continuous acquisition of all temporal goods, which may be socio-economic-political, or cultural and moral progress , taken as a whole, as general or individual well being in society.

44. CHRISTIAN ETHICS It emanates from the teaching of Jesus Christ and His Church, embodied in the Holy Scriptures and church doctrine (teaching). The ethical ultimate goal of Christianity is two faced: God’s glory and Salvation of mankind. There are 2 basic points in Christian Ethics God promises salvation to man Man freely accepts the conditions, man should believe in his divine creator through Christ his son, repent for their sins, be converted and follow Christ, for his salvation: to do or not to do God’s will (commandments). Man is free to accept and perform the conditions. He is not forced to do such. But this is an agreement man and God. It is a covenant intended by God, however, to be fulfilled by man. For man to be saved, he must do his part. God has done his part.

45. GE9 ETHICS 4 TH WEEK

46. HUMAN ACTS WHAT IS HUMAN ACT? This is referred to as the human activity of man as man by which he attains his end he wants to obtain. HUMAN ACT VS. ACTS OF MAN AOM is referring to activities of man in common with brutes like, feeling, hearing, eating, taste and smell. These activities are not classified as Human acts as they are performed without the freewill, not deliberately done, nor voluntary. HM is an act of rationality of man. It is the rational act of man which involves understanding and freewill. It is the free and conscious acts of human being proper to man alone, emanating from deliberation and freewill.

47. Acts of Man They are done indeliberately . The agent performing the act is not conscious of his actions going on. The action he is doing is not under the command of his consciousness. The acts are not done freely. They may be done force, that is, without the freedom of choice of the person. The acts are done involuntarily. The acts do not emanate from the heart of the agent.

48. Human Act The act must be deliberate. The agent does it consciously; he knows that he is doing the act and aware of its consequences, good or evil. The act must be free. The person who is doing the act must be free from external force. Otherwise, the act is not his own. The act must not be done out be fear. The act must be voluntary. The act is done out of the will and decision of the agent. The act emanates from his heart.

49. Result when the act is a Human act When the act is done, voluntarily, with knowledge, and freely, the agent becomes responsible of such act. Being so, whatever shall be the consequence of the act, he will be accountable for it. Whether the consequence of the act is good or evil, reward or punishment, the agent shall be imputable for it. In other words, human act being moral in nature is the concern of Ethics. For a human act can be morally good or morally bad.

50. Examples of Human Act An act of decision to select a course An act of killing someone An act of marriage Choice of life partner To love To vote for a candidate Act of teaching or studying

51. CLASSIFICATION OF HUMAN ACT Human acts are classified as ELICITED or COMMANDED ACTS. ELICITED ACTS- It emanates from the will of the agent. It is a will-act begun and completed in the will without bodily involvement. COMMANDED ACTS- These are the body-mind acts done to carry out the elicited act of the subject or agent Example: Pedro has the will-act of going to the court to play basketball. This is the elicited act. To carry it out, he walks (body and mind) to the court with the ball in hand to shoot. This the commanded act.

52. Elicited Acts WISH . It is a natural inclination of the will towards an object. The wishing of the will includes objects that are possible or impossible to be realized by the wishing subject. For instance, “I wish to become a millionaire.” “I wish to tour around the Globe.” “I wish to become President of the Country.” These wishes ca be possibly or impossibly attainable. INTENTION . This is the will’s tendency towards something attainable but not obligatory, however. For instance, an invitation to attend a birthday party; to go for a walk at the park; or to visit a friend.

53. Elicited Acts CONSENT. It is the acceptance of the will to implement the agent’s intention. An invited person consents to go to the affair for instance. ELECTION. The agent chooses from among a variety of means what he believes to the most effective to carry out an intention. If I go to Manila, I select to go by bus instead of the airplane, ox taxi. USE. This is the will’s command to make use of the selected means in carrying out the intention. Since I chose to go to Manila by bus, I start calling up the company office for the trip; prepare things for the trip’s purpose and then go.

54. Elicited Acts FRUITION. This is the enjoyment of the will as a result of the attainment of the object desired earlier. The invited person enjoyed the affair. Using the bus going to Manila, with the realization of accomplishment of the objectives of the trip, I enjoyed the success.

55. Commanded Acts INTERNAL ACTS. These acts refer to the purely mental faculties under the command of the will. Examples of these are: deliberate imagination for a certain purpose; intentional recall; rationalization; controlling one’s emotions; among others. EXTERNAL ACTS. These acts are done by the body as commanded by the will. MIXED. As the term connotes, mixed acts are those done by bodily and mental powers.

56. The Existence of Human Act What causes human act to exist? What motivates it to be performed? What is in the mind in doing the act? A human act cannot be caused to be performed without an objective in view. For every act that is done, there is always a corresponding end, or a goal. It is this end in view that gives the act the reason for its existence. If there is an act, the agent has an objective in mind. To attain such, he makes the act as a means to reach that objective or end.

57. Human Act and Responsibility Responsibility is the ability of a person to a need or problem in a given situation. That ability to respond is an internal quality of a person, which is free, voluntary, yet morally obligatory in himself. A responsible has that feeling of moral obligation to do an act as a response to the demand of the situation. The agent who is a moral person, feels that he must do “what-ought-to-be-done” to the demand of the prevailing situation. His conscience “tells” him from within that he must do something for the situation. “ Gawin mo ang dapat mong gawin .” (Do what you ought to do.) yet the remains free to do or to refuse the call. The agent’s at of responding to the call is a free, conscious, and voluntary act, hence moral in nature. The agent becomes responsible then for whatever is the consequence. Responding positively would mean him reward, growth and fulfillment as a person. Denial to the call would mean him retardation and self-destruction for him.

58. Freewill and Freedom HUMAN FREEWILL. Will is man’s natural tendency of being attracted to what is good and beautiful and to be repulsed from what is evil and ugly, after they have been presented by the intellect. The will is free when it acts without any pressure from outside. It is free when it is attracted to our repulses anything on a natural tendency. We call this human freewill. So in the performance of a human act, the freewill is involved, as the free contributes to the humanity of the act. The act cannot be human without the freewill. Without it, the act would be classified as an “act of man.” Freewill makes the agent becomes responsible and accountable for his act. St. Thomas Aquinas defines freedom of the will as the “power which men have of determining their actions according to the judgment of their reason.” (Summa Theo. Vol.1:737)

59. Freewill and Freedom FREEDOM. Negatively defined, freedom is the absence of constriction. Positively, it is the power to be and to act under freewill and, choice. So a human person does t realize and fulfill himself as a free being. But unlimited freedom does not exit in this world. Our freedom is “situated” or limited by the rights of others, things or persons. Our environment, social or physical, constricts our freedom. But man remains man despite the limitations of human freedom. “Man cannot be reduced to historicity, to his environment, to determinism ” ( Dy, Jr .159).

60. THE MODIFIERS OF HUMAN ACT The degree or intensity of the morality of human act depends upon the presence of certain factors that affect the commission or omission of human acts. These factors are called modifiers, namely, ignorance, concupiscence, fear, violence, and habit. These can affect human acts in their essential qualities of knowledge, freedom and voluntariness. They can reduce the moral character of the human act, which in turn would diminish the responsibility and imputability in the agent.

61. IGNORANCE It is the lack of knowledge in man of a certain thing expected to have been known by him. It is a negation of knowledge ordinarily. But intellectual ignorance is more that just a negation. It also leans of what is falsely supposed to be knowledge. THREE ASPECTS OF IGNORANCE IGNORANCE IN ITS OBJECT IGNORANCE IN ITS SUBJECT IGNORANCE IN ITS RESULT

62. IGNORANCE IN ITS OBJECT This refers to the subject ignorance of the law, fact, or corresponding penalty. Ignorance of the law is the absence of knowledge a person to possess. Ignorance of fact is ignorance of the nature or circumstances of an act that is generally forbidden in the community. Ignorance of penalty is lack of knowledge of the sanction imposed by the to violators.

63. IGNORANCE IN ITS SUBJECT This aspect of ignorance lies in the agent who has no knowledge of the law, act or penalty. This ignorance is vincible or invincible . 1. Vincible Ignorance is one that can easily be overcome through diligence and exertion of efforts by the subject. It is an ignorance that is not insurmountable. 1.1. Affected Ignorance is when a person purposely refused to acquire knowledge of a certain thing they are expected to know. 2. Invincible Ignorance is on which the subject concerned can not possibly overcome due to lack of means, among other factors.

64. IGNORANCE IN ITS RESULT This refers to the relation of ignorance to the act done out of ignorance. It has 3 forms of appearance: antecedent ignorance, concomitant ignorance, and consequent ignorance. 1. Antecedent ignorance precedes the consent of the will. 2. Concomitant ignorance accompanies an act that would be performed even if there was no ignorance. In other words, somehow the agent has some degree knowledge of the law, yet he refuses to obey due to an accompanying act. 3. Consequent ignorance is a vincible ignorance but the subject deliberately refuses to conquer it. The agent advertently does not make any effort to dispel the ignorance in order to escape responsibility and accountability.

65. MORAL PRINCIPLES under Ignorance A person c PRINCIPLE 1. INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE MAKES AN ACT INVOLUNTARILY. annot be held morally responsible and accountable for an act done due to ignorance he cannot possibly dispel or overcome not of his own negligence or fault but due to impossible means or fate. For an act to be voluntary, knowledge and freedom must be present, upon which voluntariness depends. But they were lacking, thus, the act is involuntary.

66. MORAL PRINCIPLES under Ignorance PRINCIPLE 2. VINCIBLE IGNORANCE DOES NOT RENDER THE ACT INVOLUNTARY, BUT REDUCES THE VOLUNTARINESS AND THE CORRESPONDING ACCOUNTABILITY OVER THE ACT. Vincible ignorance is within the ability of the person to overcome it. If he only exercises an effort and diligence, he can acquire the knowledge; therefore, he is accountable for the consequence of the act. But the fact o ignorance is still there, so there must be a corresponding reduction of the accountability.

67. MORAL PRINCIPLES under Ignorance Principle 3. AFFECTED IGNORANCE IN A WAY REDUCES AND IN ANOTHER WAY INTENSIFIES VOLUNTARINESS. Affected ignorance is vincible but the agent willfully does not exert an effort to dispel it. For this reason, he has some degree of voluntariness. The fact that there is ignorance however, means less voluntariness on the part of the agent. Accoutability on the result of the act is affected on both sides. Refusal or negligence to cast out the ignorance means blame on the agent, at the same time to be excused accordingly for his ignorance. Notanda: Ignorance, vincible or invincible, should not be used as a justification for an evil act done. Prevention is better than cure. Ignorance used as an excuse is a poor way of justification. Oftentimes, it is a defense mechanism.

68. CONCUPISCENCE It refers to the bodily tendencies (appetite) of man sometimes called the passions. Examples of this are the ff. love, hatred, joy, sorrow, desire, anger, hope, despair, fear, and daring; among others. We simply take them as one in this discussion as passion. There are 2 aspects of concupiscence, i.e. antecedent and consequent. 1. ANTECEDENT CONCUPISCENCE is when it suddenly springs up into action without the sanction of the will. 2 . CONSEQUENT CONCUPISCENCE is when the will acts on it favorably. Antecedent concupiscence is an ACT OF MAN and not human act, and is not a voluntary act. Since the passions are somewhat sudden reactions without deliberation, there is no amount of voluntariness involved. Thus the agent is not responsible and accountable for the consequence of the act. Consequent concupiscence, however, involves knowledge and consent of the agent, so he is responsible for the act and, therefore, accountable for its consequence.

69. MORAL PRINCIPLES UNDER CONCUPISCENCE PRINCIPLE 4. ANTECENDENT CONCUPISCENCE DIMINISHES THE VOLUNTARINESS OF THE ACT. The passions are not totally rational acts of the intellect when they act without the approval and accompaniment of the will-act. Since antecedent concupiscence occur as sudden reactions to external stimulants there is not much involvement of knowledge and freedom required for voluntariness. There was no adequate control of the intellect. Antecedent concupiscence, therefore, lessens the responsibility and corresponding accountability of the act.

70. MORAL PRINCIPLES UNDER CONCUPISCENCE PRINCIPLE 5. ANTECEDENT CONCUPISCENCE DOES NOT ELIMINATE While antecedent concupiscence diminishes voluntariness, it does not altogether eliminate the same. The word ‘diminish’ simply means reduction of its quantity or intensity, implying that voluntariness is still present. For this reason, the agent still responsible and accountable for the act, although the imputability is diminished. Murder done without deliberation is given a lighter punishment than one committed with pre-meditation.

71. FEAR This refers to a person’s perturbed state of mind due to an impending danger or evil that might befall him anytime. There are 2 kinds of FEAR, i.e. OUT-OF-FEAR and ACT-IN-FEAR. 1.OUT OF FEAR- It is an act done of fear. “ Nagawa mo ang isang bagay dahil sa takot .” 2. ACT IN FEAR- It is an act done in fear. “ Ginawa mo ang bagay nang may takot .”

72. MORAL PRINCIPLES UNDER FEAR PRINCIPLE 6. ACTS DONE IN FEAR ARE VOLUNTARY An agent performing an act with fear is in full control of his act. The act emanates from himself; he does it willfully. There is awareness, freedom and voluntariness in the agent. For this reason, he is responsible and accountable, for the act is truly human act. Acting fear is simply an accompanying circumstances.

73. MORAL PRINCIPLES UNDER FEAR PRINCIPLES 2. AN ACT DONE OUT OF FEAR HOWEVER GREAT, IS SIMPLY VOLNTARY, ALTHOUGH IT IS ALSO REGULARLY CONDITIONALLY INVOLUNTARY. While the act is done out of fear, the agent remains in control of his mind commanding the act to be done. The act then is voluntary and is a human act, not act of man. He freely chooses to proceed with the act instead of giving in to the demand of fear. But the act can also be regularly involuntary if it is done due to intense fear or out of panic. In this case, the act looses its quality of human act. Were it not for the intense fear the agent would not do the act.

74. VIOLENCE This refers to a physical external force inflicted on a person by a free agent for the purpose of compelling said person to do an act against his will. Martyrs bodily suffers or even die to force them to retract their faith. Suspects are tortured to forcibly admit a crime they did not commit. The point here is: the act they perform is against their will. For if they do not, violence will be inflicted on them. But the will can exert effort to command the body to resist the violence.

75. MORAL PRINCIPLE UNDER VIOLENCE PRINCIPLE 8. EXTERNAL ACT WHICH ARE COMMANDED, PERFORMED BY A PERSON UNDER PENDING VIOLENCE WHICH COULD BE REASONABLY RESISTED, ARE INVOLUTARY AND, THEREFORE, NOT IMPUTABLE. It is but instinctive for a human to resist violence being inflicted to him by an aggressor. In this sense, it is a moral duty to make resistance. One should not easily surrender without any attempt for self-defense. If resistance is futile, however, Agapay suggests intrinsic resistance by withholding consent as last resort.

76. HABIT This refers to repeatable acts of a person done with facility an ease. It is an acquired inclinations towards something to be done. Habit remains voluntary in the agent’s repetition or frequency of the performance of the act. It does not inn any way affect the voluntariness of such act. The agent is fully aware and free in doing the act. The agent remains responsible for the act and its result is imputable to him. Habitual act is a human act.

77. THE INDIRECT VOLUNTARY ACT There are acts done for the certain specific purpose. But acts when performed can have multiple effects other than those directly intended by the agent. Situation: A policemen successfully killed the culprit (murderer), but at the same time indirectly killed an innocent saleslady with the same bullet which killed the former. Moral Problem: Is the policeman responsible for the killing of the sales-girl? Did he intend to kill her? Was he aware that if he shoots the enemy in a crowd, others might be killed, too? Was he under freedom to refrain from shooting? Did he foresee the evil effect of his act?

78. MORAL PRINCIPLE UNDER INDIRECT VOLUNTARY ACT PRINCIPLE 9. AN AGENT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE EVIL EFFECT OF HIS INDIRECT VOLUNTARY ACT. The policeman intended the killing of the enemy without any intention for the killing of the innocent salesgirl; let us assume this in him. The officer, however, must be aware of that the bullet from his gun does not select to kill only the enemy. And in crowd, the policeman is aware that stray bullets may kill anybody. This is most likely to happen in a crowd. Besides, he has the prudence and choice to refrain from doing it and aware of the foreseeable danger. In short, the act done was a human act. Hence, the agent is responsible and, therefore, accountable for the evil effect of the act.

79. THE PRINCIPLE OF DOUBLE EFFECT An act may result to dual effects, one good and the other evil. An agent is allowed to perform such act provided the ff requirements are fulfilled. 1. The act must be good in itself or atleast morally neutral. 2. The good effect must be greater that the evil one, or equally important at least. 3. The act is only means to attain the good effect. 4. The evil effect must be the last to happen. The agent must be honest in his intention.

80. CHAPTER 5 THE MORALITY OF HUMAN ACTS WHAT IS MORALITY Most authors have common definition: it is that quality by which we classify a human act as morally good or morally evil, such quality emanating from the act itself. Morality refers to goodness or badness of an act. WHEN IS HUMAN ACT CONSIDERED AS MORALLY GOOD OR MORALLY EVIL? It is morally good act when it is done in accordance with God’s Law and human reason. An act becomes morally evil when it is done in violation of God’s Law and human reason.

81. DETERMINNANTS OF MORALITY There are three aspects of the human act that must agree or disagree with the norms, the basis of which we classify the act good or evil. These aspects are the points of the goodness or evilness of the act. 1. The act itself and its object. 2. The end of the agent 3. Circumstances

82. THE ACT AND ITS OBJECT The object of the act refers to the very nature of the act itself. What is the act itself? It is an act which is a physical tendency towards a definite objective or result. The objective is identified as the end of the act ( finis operis ), which is distinguished from the end of the agent ( finis operantis ). A morally good action must agree with the norms of morality. It must be good in itself, in its objective and in its circumstances.

83. THE ACT OF THE AGENT The end of the agent in performing the act is that which the wishes to attain by means of the act. The end is that which motivates the agent to make the act. The good human act may become evil by reason of the end of the agent. But on the other hand, a human act that is evil in itself cannot be made good by reason of the end. In other words, the goodness of the end cannot justify the evil means to become good.

84. PRINCIPLES ON THE END OF THE AGENT 1. An objectively good act done for a good end merits another goodness from such end. The more good ends a good ends a good act obtains, the more meritorious the act becomes. 2. An objectively evil act done for an evil purpose takes new evil from the evil end of the agent. If the evil ends are numerous, so numerous too shall be the malice taken from the evil ends. 3. An act which is objectively good but done for evil end, is entirely evil if the evil end is the whole motive of the act. 4. An objectively evil act can never become good by reason of good end. It is because an act to be morally good, it must be good in all 3 determinants which are the act in itself, end of the agent, and circumstance. 5. An act which is indifferent objectively may become evil if its intended end is evil.

85. CIRCUMSTANCES Circumstances are the conditions prevailing within the environment in which the act was performed. These affect the performance of the act. Examples: place, time, people, the physical condition of the place, etc. By “who” circumstance, we mean who is the agent of the act, to whom was the act done. We mean the people involved in the commission of the act. By “where” circumstance, means not simply the place, but it asks what kind of place, the nature of the place. By “which” circumstance, refers to the instrument or means that contribute to the commission of the act. In “what condition” circumstance, means the manner or how the act was done. By “when” circumstance, refers to time when the act is done. By “why” circumstance is referring to the end of the agent.

86. MORAL PRINCIPLES FROM CIRCUMSTANCES 1. An indifferent act becomes morally good or evil depending on the circumstances. (NUDE) 2. An act that is evil in itself can never be converted good by circumstances. A circumstance which is not gravely evil does not totally damage the goodness of an objectively good act.

87. THE NORMS OF MORALITY WHAT IS A NORM? It is defined as a rule, standard, or measure. It is something by which we gauge the goodness or evilness of an act. It is something with which an act conforms to be morally good; or violate to be morally evil; neutral to be morally indifferent. There are 2 norms of Morality: The Eternal Law of God- it is the ultimate norm of human acts. It is independent from any measure, hence, called objective. Human Reason- it is the conscience of a person telling him internally of what is ought to be done.

88. What is LAW? Babor : Law is a rule of action, or a principle of conduct. St. Thomas Aquinas: It is an ordinance of reason promulgated for common good by one who is in charge of society. A law is an ordinance. That law is ordinance means that it is an order coming from a legitimate authority. As an order, it is binding upon the subjects to obey. A law is not a request but a command. A law is an ordinance of reason. A law is not a product of the whims of the lawmakers, but the result of intellectual and rational study. As a product of reason, the law saw to it that to the ff. qualities are present; A law must be just A law must be honest It is possible to be fulfilled It is useful as a guide to attain a goal It must be relatively permanent It must be promulgated.

89. What is LAW? 3. A law must be promulgated. This means that the law must be publicized in order to be made known to the people who will be subjected to it. The law takes effect only when the subjects are aware of it. 4. A law must be for common good. In the first place, a law which covers not a mere single individual but a group of people or society, must serve the public good. A law should be a “liberating agency and not an enslaving one.” A true law directs man towards the attainment of their goals, temporary and ultimate. 5. A law must be promulgated in the society. Unlike a precept that is applicable to both individuals and society, a law is applicable only to a community or society, to social institutions like the state and the Church among others. 6. A law must be promulgated by one who has charge of society. The “one” refers to the legitimate lawgivers, be it a one person or group of persons, like a president or senate or congress for the state.

90. CLASSIFICATION OF LAWS ETERNAL LAW. St. Augustine of Hippo defines it as “the Divine Reason and will commanding that the natural order of things be preserved and forbidding that it be disturbed.” THE NATURAL LAW. The conscience of man silently dictates: “Do good and avoid evil.” This is an innate universal command engraved in the very heart of every man and woman regardless of time and place. This is innate in every human being; it is not acquired. It is part of man’s nature and it is a command, an order, demanding to be fulfilled.

91. OTHER CLASSIFICATION OF LAWS By author: DIVINE LAWS. These laws are authored by God, such as the 10 commandments. HUMAN LAWS. These are the laws authored by the Church or by the state, or by other institutions. Human laws are enacted by the Church are called eclessiastical laws; those made by state are called civil laws. Both laws govern one and the same people.

92. OTHER CLASSIFICATION OF LAWS By duration: TEMPORAL LAWS. These refer to all laws made by man, whether it is enacted by the Church or by the State, or by other legitimate institutions. These laws are generally subject to time and place. They are not absolute or permanent. ETERNAL LAW. As earlier stated, eternal law is God’s plan and providence for the universe.

93. OTHER CLASSIFICATION OF LAWS By Proulgation : NATURAL LAW. These are laws innate in and not acquired, directing creatures towards their respective and proper ends in accordance with their respective natures. POSITIVE LAWS. These are man-made law such as those enacted by Church and State authorities (pope, Bishops; presidents, senators, congressman, constitutional convention delegates).

94. OTHER CLASSIFICATION OF LAWS By prescription: AFFIRMATIVE LAWS. This is a kind of law which is binding in nature, but not necessarily at every moment, however. An examples is the law: “Honor thy father and thy Mother.” “Go to mass on Sundays and Holy Days of obligation.” NEGATIVE LAWS. These laws are binding always and at every moment. “Thou shall not kill” is an example.

95. NOTANDA FOR LAW A Law exists for the good of man; not man to exist for the good of law. A law is made to facilitate the good of the individual and society. It is a guide for him to attain his goals. A law is definitely a MEANS, not and end for its own sake. A good law is pro-people, not pro-institution. What is legal is not necessarily moral. Thus, abortion can be legalized; but it remains to be immoral (murder). An act may be illegal; but it can be morally good. (religious faith practice in China is illegal, but is morally good.) Love cannot be equated to law, for law is only a servant of love. Do things not because of Law but do things because of love. A genuine law is morally good too.

96. CONSCIENCE WHAT IS CONSCIENCE? This refers to man’s right judgment on things. Glenn : conscience is the practical judgment of reason upon an individual act as good and to be performed or as evil and therefore to be avoided. Agapay : We employ conscience to determine what ought-to-be-done. Thomas Aquinas : Conscience is the mind of man passing moral judgments. John A. Hardon : He described it as habitual quality of the intellect enabling it to know the basic principles of practical reasoning.

97. KINDS OF CONSCIENCE CORRECT OR TRUE CONSCIENCE . It discerns and dictates to the person what is good as good, what is evil is evil. ERRONOUS or FALSE CONSCIENCE : This conscience mistakes what is good as evil and what is evil as good. SCRUPULOUS CONSCIENCE . It is one that is extremely cautious or fearful to the point that the person refuses to do or judge the act. LAX CONSCIENCE . This is the opposite of scrupulous conscience. What is sinful act is judged as not sinful or even good act. CERTAIN CONSCIENCE . It is of sure and firm judgment on an act without a bit of doubt. He acts in the state of good faith. DOUBTFUL CONSCIENCE . It is the opposite of certain conscience. The subject suspends judgment on an act because he is not sure on the goodness or badness.