1
Morality Exam Question # 1
1) The text refers to the three traditional sources of morality for helping to
determine the gravity (or seriousness) of the sin one commits: the object
chosen, the intention, and the circumstances.
1B) In separate paragraphs provide a definition and an example of each of the
above.
2) Number and list in proper order the Ten Commandments.
3) pick one of the commandments, identify this commandment, and in separate
paragraphs provide:
a) at least two examples of a grave “objects chosen”, that would violate this
commandment.
b) a scenario of serious sin being committed with a venial object chosen but
with a “grave” intention, and
c) a scenario where the circumstances make an intrinsically evil “object
chosen” a venial sin, and/or where the circumstances make minor wrong
doing (object chosen) a grave sin.
The “object chosen” refers to what we actually do or consider doing. The object chosen
can refer to actions we know are good (feeding the poor) or to actions we know are bad
or inherently evil (selling drugs, killing innocent people).
The “intention” refers to our motive or intention in performing an act. Giving a blanket
to a homeless person because we are concerned for her is a good intention. Cleaning a
neighbor’s house because we want to steal from that neighbor is an example of a good act
done with an evil motive. Assassinating a tyrannical dictator because we want to free a
nation from oppression is an evil act for an apparently good reason. But we cannot
justify an evil act performed for good reasons, so we must look for an alternative action
that serves our good purpose.
The “circumstances” of an act refers to conditions surrounding the act that affect its
goodness or evil. Certain factors, like the amount of a theft, can increase or diminish the
moral goodness or evil of an act. They can also diminish or increase one responsibility,
such as acting out of fear, ignorance, pressure or passion.
“A morally good act requires the goodness of its object, of its end [intention], and of its
circumstances together” (CCC 1760).
Ten Commandments
1. I am the Lord you God: you shall not have strange gods before me. 2. You shall
not take the name of the Lord your God in vain. 3. Remember to keep holy the
Lord’s Day. 4. Honor your father and your mother. 5. You shall not kill (Do not
2
kill innocent human life). 6. You shall not commit adultery. 7. You shall not
steal (Do not steal what one would not reasonably give you). 8. You shall not
bear false witness against your neighbor (Do not lie to one who deserves to know
the truth.) 9. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife. 10. You shall not covet
your neighbor’s goods.
The seventh commandment concerns “thou shall not steal” that which a reasonable
person would not give you.
1a) First scenario: If the “object chosen” was to rob a large amount of money from
someone, to cause a large amount of vandalism or destruction to private property, to steal
someone’s dignity by forcing them to perform a grave immoral act, to steal from an
employer by regularly not attending to one’s job responsibilities, or by not returning
something of significant value borrowed from someone, are all examples of “objects
chosen” that are serious wrongdoing and would generally be considered grave or mortal
sins.
1b) Second scenario: A venial “object chosen” might be to steal just a few dollars from a
wealthy student with the grave “intention” of throwing suspicion and hostility for the
theft toward another student who regularly suffers some form of meanness by other
members of the student body, which could make this act gravely wrong.
1c) Third scenario: Another venial “object chosen” might be to call in sick to work on a
day you are actually feeling fine with the grave “intention” of causing your boss to be
unprepared and docked in pay for a poor performance review, lacking the statistical data
he was depending upon you to prepare on the day you called in sick.
The eighth commandment is “do not bear false witness” to another who deserves to know
the truth from you.
2a) First scenario: If the “object chosen” was to commit perjury (that is to lie in one’s
court testimony where you had previously taken an oath to tell the truth), or to lie to
parents or other authority figures about a serious matter over some aspect of your life that
they are responsible (have oversight) for, would be examples of an “object chosen” that
would normally be considered grave or mortally wrong.
2b) Second scenario: A minor wrongdoing (object chosen) might be to tell a prospective
employer of a friend a minor lie about him not being a “people person” with the grave
“intention” of seeking out the very job your friend is being considered for.
2c) Third scenario: Someone commits bank robbery, a seriously wrong “object chosen”
due to the “circumstances” of a loved one being held hostage under threat of death, unless
that person robs the bank. In this situation the “circumstances” can mitigate one’s
culpability for the “object chosen.”
3
Morality Exam Question # 2
The “Principle of Double Effect”
a) Why is it necessary to have this “Principle of Double Effect?”
b) In separate paragraphs, explain and give an example from the below
scenario that helps illustrate the below four principles of the “Principle of
Double Effect.”
1)
2)
3)
4)
The action must be good in itself or at least indifferent.
The evil is not intended as the end (a goal of our action).
The evil effect cannot be the means of the good effect.
The good effect must balance the evil effect.
Scenario
A young woman is expecting her third child when she is diagnosed with uterine
cancer. The cancer is advanced, and without an immediate hysterectomy (removal
of the uterus), the expectant mother will die. Her unborn child, however, is unable
to survive outside the womb at this point, and to await the viability of the child
would, in the doctor’s best judgment, likely cause the death of both the mother and
the child. However, the proposed operation will also certainly cause the child’s
death, though it will save the mother’s life.
Answer
a) The Principle of Double Effect is necessary because not every human action has
only good effects or bad effects. Some bring about evil results even though an
individual intends to do good. The “Principle of Double Effect” can help us
determine whether or not actions that have a good and an evil effect are
permissible, that is, morally good to do.
Principle 1: The action must be good in itself or at least indifferent
Explanation: An intrinsically evil action like abortion is never permissible, even if it has a
good effect, because abortion is always evil in itself.
Example: Applying the first condition to the scenario, the removal of a diseased organ
that threatens the life of a young woman is surely a good action. Therefore the action is
good in and of itself.
Principle 2: The evil is not intended as an end (a goal of our action)
Explanation: The good effect must be directly intended, and the evil effect, although
foreseen, must not be intended but only permitted or tolerated. One may never directly
4
intend an evil: rather one allows the evil to occur because it cannot be separated from the
good intended.
Example: From the above scenario, the second condition would be met if the physician
intends to save the mother’s life by removing the uterus, and, although he foresees the
risk of the death of the unborn child, he only permits or tolerates it as an undesired and
inseparable side effect of his actions. (If the life of the baby could be saved it would be.)
Principle 3: The evil effect cannot be the means to the good effect.
Explanation: The good effect must be the direct result of the action taken, since the end
(our goal) does not justify the means (any method we choose to obtain our goal – because
some actions like abortion, murder, rape, etc. are evil always and everywhere). One
cannot commit an action in which the good effect comes about as a direct result of the
evil effect.
Example: In this case, the good effect (saving the life of the mother) is not a result of the
death of the child. The mother’s life is saved by the removal of the diseased uterus.
Whether an unborn child is in that uterus or not does not change the fact the removing the
organ saves the mother’s life. The good effect (saving the life of the mother) does not
come about as a result of the bad effect (the death of the child).
Principle 4: The good effect must balance the evil effect.
Explanation: The good effect of the action taken must be equal to or outweigh the evil
effect. In other words, when there is a foreseeable evil effect of an action, there must be
a proportionately grave reason for acting.
Example: In the scenario provided, the life of the mother and the life of the child are both
valuable and important. The good of saving the mother’s life is commensurate with the
evil of causing the child’s death.
The action that meets all four of these conditions may be permissible. This scenario
meets all four conditions of the Principle of Double Effect. The doctor is therefore
permitted to remove the cancerous uterus, despite the fact that the death of the unborn
child will result.