Chapter 6 Outline – Morality and Action
1. Human Acts
 Human Acts: one done with intellect and will, knowledge and consent, may be good or evil
 Acts of Humans: do not involve intellect and will (example – breathing, sneezing)
2. Components of the Moral Choice
 The Object is the matter of the human act or the action itself, determines the morality of an act. A
good toward which the will directs itself.
 The Intention or End refers to the subject or person, the end is the motive or intention for which a
person commits a good or evil act. A movement of the will toward the end, the goal of the activity.
 Circumstances are the factors that occur with the act and that contribute to the morality of the act.
The moral conditions that are added to and modify the moral nature of an action. There are six:
who, what, where, why, how and when
3. The Principle of Double Effect: used to determine whether or not actions that have a good and an evil
effect are permissible.
An action that meets all four of the conditions listed below may be permissible:
a. the action must be good in itself (or indifferent) – an intrinsic evil action is never permitted even if
it has a good effect.
b. the agent must have the right intention (bad effect is permitted or tolerated). One may never
directly intend an evil rather one allows the evil to occur because it cannot be separated from the
good that was intended.
c. the evil effect cannot be the means to the good effect. The good effect must be a direct result of
the action since the end does not justify the means. Cannot commit an action in which the good
effect comes about as a direct result of the evil effect
d. the good effect must balance the evil effect – the good effect must be equal to or outweigh the evil
effect. When there is a foreseeable evil effect of an action, there must be a proportionately grave
reason for acting.
4. The Objectivity of Good and Evil
Modern secular ethics – denies the reality of moral good and evil. Acknowledges the existence of good and
evil but sees then as corresponding to the different circumstances of an individual. Therefore, not objective
and susceptible to change.
5. Historical Argument for Moral Objectivity
Circumstances are a significant factor in judging the goodness or malice of an act, but never does the
morally good or evil depend solely on the circumstances.
6. Some Errors from Ethical Relativism
Most Common Errors:
a. Situation Ethics: moral good and evil result from the situation in which the person finds himself.
The act cannot be judged alone, but only in its circumstances. Claims that moral conduct cannot be
guided by universal principles, but must be guided by the concrete circumstances in which each
person finds himself.
i. Pope Pius XII argument against situation ethics: it is not based on universal moral
laws.
ii. Denies the existence of moral absolutes.
b.
Consequentialism: moral concepts of good and evil are derived from the consequences that follow
an act, and not from the objectivity of the law that determines them. Therefore, as act is good if
goodness results from the act and evil if evil results from the action.
There are three errors in this theory:
1. the effects are overvalued; ignores the principle that states that an evil does not bring
about good (St. Paul)
2. violates the principle that the end does not justify the means
3. advocates may consider those consequences that are good for him but not good for
another person or for society
c.
Proportionalism: seeks to justify the morality of an act by the proportion of the effects that follow
it (variation of consequentialism). If the evil that follows is less in proportion to the good, then the
act is good (and vice versa). This method trivializes the importance of morality.
i. Neither the circumstances nor the results are the criteria for judging human actions
ii. A morality based on this theory would destroy the moral concepts of good and evil
and render them meaningless.