The ideal is for man to act deliberately, that is, with perfect voluntariness. This is not always possible though. Oftentimes, a
certain degree of doubt or reluctance accompanies an act. At other times, emotions hold sway, propelling action with the
swiftness of an impulse.
Factors that influence man's inner disposition towards certain actions are called "modifiers" of human acts. They affect the
mental or emotional state of a person to the extent that the voluntariness involved in an act is either increased or decreased.
This is significant because the accountability of the act is correspondingly increased or decreased.
We cite this principle: The greater the knowledge and the freedom, the greater the voluntariness and the moral responsibility.
(Panizo: 38)
The Modifiers
Man does not act in a vacuum. He is an organism responding and reacting to stimulus. His total make-up is the sum of
all experiences. His personal background, education, social upbringing, political persuasion, religion, and personal aims
- contribute largely to his development and behavioral preferences.
Authors point to the following as modifiers of human acts; (1) Ignorance, (2) Passions, (3) Fear, (4) Violence, and (5)
Habit. There are other modifiers which are worth discussing but for the limitation of this book, such as, hypnotism,
brainwashing, mental conditioning, and cultural imposition.
Ignorance
We are familiar with the saying: "Ignorance of the law excuses no one". This implies that one should not act in the state
of ignorance and that one who has done a wrong may not claim ignorance as a defense. Ignorance is the absence of
knowledge which a person ought to possess. A lawyer is expected to know his law; the doctor, his medicine; and the
manager, his business operations. In the realm of morals, everyone of age and reason is expected to know at least the
general norms of good behavior.
Ignorance is either vincible or invincible. Vincible ignorance can easily be reminded through ordinary diligence and
reasonable efforts. The ignorance of a visitor regarding a particular address in a certain place is vincible, since he can
easily ask for information from a policeman or pedestrian.
Invincible ignorance is the type which a person possesses without being aware of it, or, having awareness of it, lacks the
means to rectify it. The ignorance regarding missing persons or objects is often invincible. Sometimes, too, a person acts
without realizing certain facts. Thus, a cook might be unaware that the food he is serving is contaminated.
Under the category of vincible ignorance is the affected ignorance. This is the type which a person keeps by positive
efforts in order to escape responsibility or blame. It is affected ignorance when an employee refuses to read a memo
precisely so that he may be exempted from its requirement. (Glenn: 26-27).
Principles:
1.
2.
3.
Invincible ignorance renders an act involuntary. A person cannot be held morally liable if he is not aware of his
state of ignorance. A waiter who is not aware that the food he is serving has been poisoned cannot be held for
murder (Glenn: 32).
Vincible ignorance does not destroy, but lessens the voluntariness and the corresponding accountability over
the act. A person who becomes aware of the state of ignorance he is in has the moral obligation to rectify it by
exercising reasonable diligence in seeking the needed information. To act with vincible ignorance is to act
imprudently. A waiter who suspects that the food he is serving has been laced with poison has the moral
obligation to ascertain the fact or, at least, forewam the guests about his suspicion (Glenn: 33).
Affected ignorance, though it decreases voluntariness, increases the accountability over the resultant act.
Insofar as affected ignorance interfers with the intellect, it decreases voluntariness. But insofar as it is willed
to persist, it increases accountability. Certainly, refusing to rectify ignorance implies malice. And the malice is
greater when ignorance is used as an excuse for not doing the right thing. Thus, a child who refuses to be guided
by his parents has only himself to blame for his wrongdoing.
Passions
Passions, or concupiscence, are either tendencies towards desirable objects, or, tendencies away from undesirable or
harmful things. The former is called positive emotions; the latter, negative emotions. The positive emotions include
love, desire, delight, hope and bravery. The negative emotions include hatred, horror, sadness, despair, fear and anger.
Passions are psychic responses. As such, they are neither moral or immoral. However, man is bound to regulate his
emotions and submit them to the control of reason.
Passions are either antecedent or consequent. Antecedent are those that precede an act. It may happen that a person is
emotionally aroused to perform an act. Antecedent passions predispose a person to act. Thus, love may induce one to
make numerous and lengthy phone calls to his sweetheart, or, to plot the murder of a rival.
Principle: Antecedent passions do not always destroy voluntariness, but they diminish accountability for the resultant
act. Antecedent passions weaken the will power of a person without, however, completely obstructing his freedom.
Thus, the so called "crimes of passion" are voluntary. But insofar as passions interfere with the freedom of the will. one's
accountability is diminished (Panizo: 33).
Consequent passions are those that are intentionally aroused and kept. Consequent passions, therefore, are said to be
voluntary in cause, the result of the will playing the strings of emotions. Thus, a young man may deliberately arouse
himself sexually by reading pornographic magazines. Or a victim of injustice may intentionally nurse his resentment
towards his tormentor. The young man who commits lasciviousness after arousing himself sexually and the fellow who
commits vengeance due to his cultivated resentment- are both morally accountable.
Principle: Consequent passions do not lessen voluntariness, but may even increase accountability. This is because
consequent passions are the direct results of the will which fully consents to them instead of subordinating them to its
control (Ibid.).
Fear
Fear is the disturbance of the mind of a person who is confronted by an impending danger or harm to himself or loved
ones. Distinction is made however between an act done with fear and an act done out or because of fear.
Certain actions which by nature are dangerous or risky are done with varying degree of fear. Climbing a cliff, flying an
airplane through a storm, diving for pearls, or arresting a notorious killer - are examples of acts performed with fear. In
these cases, fear is a normal response to danger. Such actions are voluntary, because the doer is in full control of his
faculties and acts inspite of his fear.
Fear is an instinct for self-preservation. We even fear new experiences or situations such as, embarking on a long
journey, being left alone in a strange place, or being asked to speak before a group of people. But doing something out
of fear, or because of it, is entirely different. Here, fear becomes a positive force compelling a person to act without
careful deliberation.
The child reads his book out of fear of the mother; the employee volunteers to work over-time out of fear of being fired
by the boss; a friend stops smoking out of fear of contracting cancer. These examples show. how actions are done
because of fear. Fear modifies the freedom of the doer, inducing him to act in a certain predetermined manner, often
without his full consent.
Principles:
1.
2.
3.
Acts done with fear are voluntary. A person acting with fear is acting in spite of his fear and is in full control of
himself.
Acts done out of fear, however great, is simply voluntary, although is also conditionally voluntary. (Glenn:41)
It is simply voluntary because the person remains in control of his faculties, including that of moderating fear.
It is also " conditionally involuntary" because, if it were not for the presence of something feared, the person
would not act, or would act in another way. (Ibid.: 41)
Acts done because of intense fear or panic are involuntary. (Ibid.) Panic completely obscures the mind. In this
mental state, a person is not expected to think sensibly. Thus, a person in a state of panic might jump from the
12th floor of a burning building. Such act is not considered a suicide, since it is done involuntarily. Panic causes
a person to lose complete control of himself.
Intimidating or threatening a person with harm is an unjust act. Legally speaking, actions done out of fear are invalid
acts. Thus, contracts entered into out of fear are voidable, meaning, they can later on be annulled. It is grossly unfair to
oblige any person to fulfill a contract obtained by force or threat. (Ibid.: 42)
Violence
Violence refers to any physical force exerted on a person by another free agent for the purpose of compelling said person
to act against his will. Bodily torture, maltreatment, isolation, and mutilation-are examples of violence against persons.
Principles
1.
External actions, or commanded actions, performed by a person subjected to violence, to which reasonable
resistance has been offered, are involuntary and are not accountable. (Ibid.: 43)
Active resistance should always be offered to an unjust aggressor. However, if resistance is impossible,
or if there is a serious threat to one's life, a person confronted by violence can always offer intrinsic
resistance by withholding consent; that is enough to save his moral integrity. (Panizo: 37)
2. Elicited acts, or those done by the will alone, are not subject to violence and are therefore voluntary. Ibid.)
The Will insofar as it is a spiritual faculty is not within the reach of violence. History carries the story
of thousand heroes who had suffered death instead of surrendering their will to that of their tormentors.
On the contrary, we consider them villains or weaklings those who succumbed and consented to the wishes
of tyrants. But we may not be too harsh on them, since every man has his own limit of endurance. "Violence
of force", says Bernard Haring, "in any instance, if bound up with the refined cruelty of present-day
methods of psychological torture, can constitute a serious temptation and often also contribute towards a
notable diminution of inner freedom." (Haring: 108)
Habits
Habit, as defined by Glenn, "is a lasting readiness and facility, born of frequently repeated acts, for acting in a certain
manner." (Ibid.: 43) Habits are acquired inclinations towards something to be done. They assume the role of a second
nature, moving one who has them to perform certain acts with relative ease.
The word "habit-forming" that we use to refer to certain experiences shows how easy it is for one to acquire a habit. It
also implies that a habit is not that easy to overcome or alter. It requires a strong-willed person to correct a habit
successfully within a limited period of time. Thus, alcoholics and smokers find it almost impossible to reform,
Principle
Actions done by force of habit are voluntary in cause, unless a reasonable effort is made to counteract the habitual
inclination. (Ibid.: 44) Habits are either good or bad. We speak here of bad habits which lead to immoral actions.
Habits are voluntary in cause, because they are the result of previously willed acts done repeatedly as a matter of fact.
Thus, every action emanating from habit is said to partake of the voluntariness of those previous acts. Therefore, for as
long as the habit is not corrected, evil actions done by force of that habit are voluntary and accountable.
When a person decides to fight his habit, and for as long as the effort towards this purpose continues, actions resulting
from such habit may be regarded as acts of man and not accountable. The reason, as pointed out by Glenn, is that the
cause of such habit is no longer expressly desired. (Ibid.: 45)
Action and Emotion
Man does not act the way a robot does-without feeling or emotion. In doing his act, man does not only evoke certain
sentiments, but his decision or intention to perform is swayed by his emotions. One who loves to sing does not only sing
with "feelings" but is moved and motivated to sing when the occasion is there.
Emotions are generally instinctive in origin. Neither the degree of their intensity, clarity, or awareness makes them
human acts to be judged as good or evil. They become good or evil by the attitude of the person manifesting them. A
person who nourishes his feeling of hostility towards another is more prone to acquire the motive for inflicting harm
on the object of his hatred. This is not to say that man is helpless in the tide of his emotions and that man's responses
to action are emotionally motivated. It means simply that man's thoughts and actions are colored by his emotions.
The psychological and moral aspects of the inner life of man are expressed positively by the affections of love,
kindness, humility, reverence, justice, and purity. These have a vitalizing, purifying, enriching effect. Here we
have psychic energies which in some manner precede every decision and influence it. They are an intimate
approval of their object, a "purposeless" confirmation of their worth. The negative dispositions tend toward
disdain and denial (as though to blot out the very existence of the object of hatred, disdain, envy), repudiation,
disruption. But it is possible that the objective goal (perhaps a person) of these dispositions is totally unaffected
by them. Again, they may be brushed aside or overcome. Nevertheless, every instance, by a kind of inner
compulsion, they exert a direct and immediate influence on the subject himself. The tendency is ever present
to promote, to vitalize, or, is the effect be baneful, to scorn and isolate. And it is also true that in every instance
the effect on the subject is greater. More surely and more vehemently is the subject of emotions affected than
the object to which they are directed. Emotions make up the very heart of man, from which come both good
and evil. (Bernard Haring, The Law of Christ, Vol. 1, Mercier Press, Cork, 1960, p. 199.
Refinement of Emotions
Ethics deals with emotions as factors affecting human motivation and behavior. Instead of repressing them, it calls for
their refinement. This means that man is expected to act not only with his mind and body, but precisely with his heart
and soul. Thus, for instance, the Decalogue does not merely command that we love God, but adds to say "with all your
heart and with all your soul".
In the purist sense, doing good for another is not a virtue unless it comes from the "love" of what is good. Any other
motive is inadequate regardless of the merits of the assistance offered. It is possible indeed to extend a loan to a friend
and this - grudgingly.
In like manner, mere external obedience to a law is cold and hypocritically convenient. The ethical expectation is to
enter into the spirit of the law and to accept it with humility and respect.
"It is evident", says Bernard Haring, "that education, through proper discipline and cultivation of emotional life (in
which we include the cultivation of the values of character and disposition), is in many ways more significant than the
tense straining of will power." (Ibid.) Indeed, the aim of ethics is not to turn man into an efficient machine to do things.
Rather, it hopes to transform man by inner spiritual conversion.
Moral perfection comes from within. We, Filipinos, refer to it as "kagandahan ng loob". It is "loob" because it radiates
from within the human personality.
Kagandahan ng Loob
Includes such a moral value as mapagmahal, maunawain, may-pakiramdam, may-pakikiramay, matulungin, masayahin,
and hindi mapagkunawari
Man does not act aimlessly. When he acts, it is because he enjoys the action, or, because he wants to achieve something
by that action.
Pablito may play basketball because he enjoys it. Or he may play because he wants to qualify for the varsity team.
The End of an Act
What we call end is the purpose or goal of an act. It is that which completes or finishes an act. Distinction is made
between end of the act and end of the doer or agent.
The end of the act is the natural termination of an activity (Glenn: S2). The end of the eating is nourishment; that of
reading is comprehension; that of basketball is scoring a goal, and that of jogging is physical exercise.
The end of the doer is the personal purpose intended by the person performing the act. He who eats aims to satisfy his
hunger; the reader, to relax himself; the basketball player, to win the game, and the jogger, to maintain physical fitness.
The end of the doer is called the motive. The motive is the reason why a person performs an act. It is the force that
sustains the act and brings it to completion. (Ibid.)
Kinds of Ends
The end of the doer is either
a) Proximate or Remote End
b) Intermediate or Ultimate End
1.
The proximate end is the purpose which a doer wishes to accomplish immediately by his action. The remote end
is the purpose which a doer wishes to accomplish in a series of acts. The proximate end of eating is the satisfaction
of hunger. Its remote end is the promotion of health.
2.
The ultimate end is the purpose which is desired for its own sake and not because of something else. The
intermediate end is the purpose which is desired as a means for obtaining another thing. The attainment of an
ultimate end completes an act and stops all further acts. The attainment of an intermediate end leads either to
another intermediate end or to an ultimate end. (Ibid, 3.52),
A student may assign his graduation as an ultimate end. The intermediate end, in this case, would consist in all of
those activities leading towards graduation, such as attending classes, taking exams. participating in recitation, and
so on.
A series of separate actions finds meaning in their relation to an ultimate end or goal. This is fundamentally true
with life itself. Living consists of all human activities. Viewed in their entirety, all human activities are tendencies
towards the ultimate purpose of life itself. This ultimate end of life is happiness.
Action and Motivation
Alfredo Panizo gives us the opportunity to cite principles conceming human action (Panizo: 10):
1. Every agent that performs an action act for the sake of an end or purpose to be attained.
Man is a motivated animal. For him to act, he must first find the motive to act. Sometimes the motive comes
instantaneously, as when one stands up to answer the doorbell. Sometimes, the motive comes out from tedious
and well calculated efforts, as a business. Sometimes, the motive is provoked by selfishness and malice, At other
times, it is inspired by love and concern for others. Whichever way, motives give life to action. Without it, man
finds no reason why he must act at all.
2. Every agent acts towards an ultimate end.
The ultimate end is that on account of which man decides to act. It is what is desired through the actions. It is
what confers meaning to an activity. The concept of motive implies that there is something important to be
achieved. No sane person would waste his time sitting in a bus simply because he does not want to go anywhere.
When someone takes a bus, we may rightly assume that he wants to go someplace: his ultimate destination.
Similarly, and in all his actions, man seeks an ultimate purpose.
Conformity with excellence; and if there is more than one excellence, it will be the best and the most complete
of these. (Aristotle: 293)
A thinker once wrote that human beings have their needs, while individual humans have their wants. Needs
are those goods which are essential to man as man. Without them, man is incomplete and underdeveloped.
"Wants are those goods that an individual requires because of his particular circumstance in life. Obviously, the
needs must first be fulfilled before the wants.
The good that fits man as man are the needs of his rational nature. All other needs, such as the biological and
social, while they are similarly required, are subordinate to the rational needs.
Kinds of Good
1.
Essential and Accidental.
Those that fit the natural needs of man as man are essential good. Such good include food, shelter, health,
knowledge, virtue, and life. Those that fit the wants of an individual because of his circumstance are accidental
good. Such include money, car, good name, academic degree, power, and luxury, and many more.
Essential good is also called perfective because they contribute to the integral perfections of man. Accidental
good, on the other hand, are called non-perfective because they merely contribute to the external worth or
appearance of a person.
2.
Real Apparent.
A good is something which has an intrinsic value. Thus, we call it: Value. It possesses qualities rendering it
"fitting" or desirable. Examples of real good are good acts and habits, parents and parenthood, pleasure and
joy, work and leisure, etcetera. The real good includes both essential and accidental goods.
An apparent good is actually an evil thing but is viewed as "good" under certain aspects. Examples are diseases,
sadness, death, worry, crimes, etcetera.
3.
Perfective and Non-perfective good.
Perfective good is that which contributes to the integral perfection of a person, such as: education, virtue, food,
exercise, medicine. Non-perfective good is that which merely contributes to the external appearance or
convenience of a person, such as: clothes, wealth, social status, political power, etcetera.
4.
Perfect and Imperfect good.
Also called unlimited or limited goods respectively, or absolute and relative goods.
Perfect good has the fullness of qualities enabling it to fully satisfy human desire. Imperfect good possesses
only certain qualities so that it does not fully satisfy human desire except in a relative or limited sense. All
"earthly" goods are imperfect. Only God, in the absolute sense, is perfect good.
The Greatest Good
In every activity, man seeks that which is good. The greatest good as a matter of fact. This is evident in our concern for
the best in everything: best friends, best parents, best food, best performance, best job and so forth. In the language of
the philosophers, the greatest good is the Summum Bonum.
For Aristotle, the greatest good is happiness. Happiness is what man aims to achieve in all his activities. The ultimate
purpose of life is the attainment of happiness.
By absolutely final, we mean that which is sought for its own sake, and never as a means to something else. Happiness
seems to be something of that sort. We always pursue that for its intrinsic valuc, never as a means; whereas we pursue
honor, pleasure, wisdom, and all the virtues, both for their own sakes (we would want them even if they led to nothing
further) and for the sake of happiness, since we think we shall attain happiness by means of them. But no one wants
happiness as a means to these other things, or indeed as a means to anything else at all (Aristotle 292)
As a psychological state, happiness is the feeling of contentment arising from the possession of a good. As a state of
being, it is the perfection arising from the possession of the good. Happiness coming from the possession of the greatest
good constitutes man's perfection.
Now, which is the greatest good? What wonderful thing is there the possession of which will fully and absolutely satisfy
human desire so that nothing more remains to be desired? If the greatest good does not exist, or if it does but is totally
beyond man's grasp, then human life would be pointless. Ethics explains the best answers to this one fundamental
question of life.
Some errors concerning happiness:
1.
2.
3.
Some people give the impression that money or wealth can buy happiness. This is tragic because money merely
feeds the bottomless appetite of greed Money, besides, is aptly considered the root of all evils, because it gives
a false sense of power. The fact is that riches beget worry, selfish competition, waste, oppression, and all other
forms of injustices. If the Bible is to be believed, the avarice of the rich makes it very difficult for him to enter
heaven. The camel may pass easily through the eye of a needle, but not the rich who has grown much bigger
because of pride.
Some people equate health with happiness. Of course, health is a prerequisite to a productive life. But there is
the sick who are at the same time happy. The present-day preoccupation with physical fitness may not be
wrong. But he who invests happiness in the beauty and agility of the human anatomy might not have much to
look forward to when age catches up with him. It is wonderful to be strong and healthy, but happiness is
somewhere else.
Sensual people vainly seek happiness in earthly pleasures. But one may not indulge in all the pleasures of this
world without ending up with pain. Nature shows how overeating, for instance, causes the stomach to ache.
And some people are simply wasting away because of their imprudent indulgence in liquor, tobacco, or sex.
Pleasures of the body are poor copy of the true lasting happiness that man longs for. Certainly, an animal who
has a rational soul deserves better fate than AIDS or cancer.
4.
5.
6.
Certain people cling to their public image as if God Himself was made after their illusion. Surrounded by an
adoring crowd, these popular personages exhibit the exuberance of being "super": putting themselves above
the ordinary folk. And yet, fame and fortune are fragile as the mirror that reflects their vanity. (Ibid:)
Some dedicate their lives to science and arts. Doubtlessly, the sciences and the arts are essential to man's
development. They are however the means rather than the end in themselves. They are precisely instruments
leading to the promotion of human well-being. The same can be said of virtue.
Some propose that the final purpose of man is the promotion of the State or Government. While man is sociable
and needs the State to regulate his social, political and economic relations, the good of the individual comes
ahead of that of the State. Thus, the ideal State does not sacrifice the well-being of its members. Precisely, it is
the function of government to make possible the happiness of its members or citizens.
Natural and Supernatural Happiness
Natural happiness is that which is attainable by man through the use of his natural powers. Supernatural happiness is
that which is attainable by man through the use of his natural powers as these are informed and aided by God's infusion
of grace. Supernatural Happiness is a study belonging properly to Moral Theology. We may mention in passing that
supernatural happiness consists in "beatific vision" of God. (Joseph Buckley, Man's Last End, London: Herder Book, Co.,
1950, p. 82)
Natural Happiness "consists in the perfection that can be attained by man through the employment of his body and soul
and the powers inherent in them: intellect, will, internal and external sensory powers, the sense appetites, locomotion,
nutrition, and growth" (Ibid.: 83)
For Aristotle, it was obvious that natural happiness does not rest on one single good object. Rather, it consists in the
attainment of all those things that are essential to human growth and development. These goods, however, must be
ranked in a hierarchy: from the lowest level to the highest level. Complete happiness, in the natural order, consists in
those goods pertaining to the soul; "but some of the other goods must necessarily be there, with others, which are by
nature tools, cooperating and of use toward other ends". (Aristotle; 297)
The highest good, according to Aristotle, belongs to the intellect: the contemplation of truth. But this fullness of
knowledge is attained through virtue:
"Even if happiness is not sent from heaven, but comes about through virtue and learning or training, it seems
that it is one of the most godlike things. The prize and end of virtue appears to be the best. thing, something
godlike and blessed. Happiness will also be within the reach of everyone, since, through learning and exercise,
it can be obtained by all who are not totally corrupted as regards virtue.. (ibid.: 296)
The Ultimate Purpose
Aristotle does not go beyond earthly life in his dissertation on the last or ultimate end of man. Christian philosophers,
notably St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, teach that man, in every deliberate action acts toward an end, and
ultimately, to an absolutely ultimate end: happiness. Since man's desire and tendency towards happiness is unlimited,
nothing short of the Absolutely Perfect Good can satisfy it perfectly. Therefore God, the Infinite Good, is the greatest
good, or "summum bonum", to be attained as the ultimate end.
Man cannot attain perfect happiness in this life, because God can never be known perfectly by man's natural powers.
But man can approximate perfect happiness in this life by knowledge and love of God and by the exercise of virtue. (Paul
Glenn: The History of Philosophy, A text Book of Undergraduates, London: Herder Book, co., 1963, pp. 164-165; 242
243)