Lesson 3, 4 and 5 Ethics.pdf

lOMoARcPSD|45536012 Lesson 3, 4 and 5 Ethics - none. Ethics (Cebu Institute of Technology – University) Scan to open on Studocu Studocu is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university Downloaded by Rory Horowitz (re...

lOMoARcPSD|45536012 Lesson 3, 4 and 5 Ethics - none. Ethics (Cebu Institute of Technology – University) Scan to open on Studocu Studocu is not sponsored or endorsed by any college or university Downloaded by Rory Horowitz ([email protected])  lOMoARcPSD|45536012 Lesson 3 a. Ignorance of Law MODIFIERS OF HUMAN ACTS - refers to the ignorance of the existence of a duty, rule, or The modi昀椀ers of human acts regula琀椀on. - refer to the things that may a昀昀ect b. Ignorance of Fact the human act's essen琀椀al quali琀椀es and thus lessen the moral character - refers to the ignorance of the nature of the act and consequently diminish or circumstances of an act as the responsibility of the agent. forbidden. - It is also lack of knowledge that what 1. IGNORANCE one is actually doing comes under the prohibi琀椀on of a known law. - It means the lack or absence of knowledge. c. Ignorance of Penalty a. Nega琀椀ve Ignorance - lack of knowledge of the precise sanc琀椀on a昀케xed to the law. - absence of intellectual knowledge in man.  Ignorance in its Subject Example: A philosophy teacher lacks knowledge about higher mathema琀椀cs. - refers to the agent in whom ignorance exists. b. Priva琀椀ve Ignorance VINCIBLE IGNORANCE/ - absence of knowledge that ought to CULPABLE IGNORANCE be present. Example: A licensed civil engineer lacks - can be dismissed by the use of knowledge about strength of materials. ordinary diligence. - This result due to lack of proper c. Posi琀椀ve Ignorance diligence on the agent and is his fault. - presence of false knowledge. - also called mistake or error. Example: Judging someone in the mall Degrees of Vincible Ignorance: as an acquaintance but really is not due to poor eyesight. a. Crass (Stupid / Gross) Ignorance  IGNORANCE IN ITS OBJECT - if it be the result of total or nearly total lack of e昀昀ort to dispel it. - This talks about the thing of which the agent may be ignorant about. Downloaded by Rory Horowitz ([email protected])  lOMoARcPSD|45536012 b. Simply Vincible Ignorance IGNORANCE IN ITS RESULT - If some e昀昀orts were done but not - This refers to acts performed while persevering and whole-hearted ignorance exists. e昀昀ort, be unsuccessfully used to dispel it. a. Antecedent Ignorance c. A昀昀ected Ignorance - precedes all consent of the will. - if posi琀椀ve e昀昀ort is made not to b. Concomitant Ignorance dispel but to retain it. - accompanies an act that would have INVINSIBLE IGNORANCE/ been performed even if the INCULPABLE IGNORANCE ignorance did not exist. - An act done in concomitant - cannot be dispelled by ordinary and ignorance is non voluntary proper diligence - because the agent has no realiza琀椀on c. Consequent Ignorance whatever of his lack of knowledge - the agent who realizes his ignorance - follows upon an act of the will. The 昀椀nds ine昀昀ec琀椀ve his e昀昀ort to dismiss will may directly a昀昀ect it or crassly it. neglect to dispel it. - This is not the fault of the agent. Ethical Principles of Ignorance Degrees of Invincible Ignorance: a. Invincible Ignorance a. Physically Invincible Ignorance - destroys the voluntariness of an act. - if no human e昀昀ort can dismiss it. An act, in so far as it proceeds from invincible ignorance, b. Morally Invincible Ignorance i - lacks voluntariness, - is not a human act, and is not imputable to the agent. - If it would be extremely di昀케cult to dismiss it even with the aid of some b. Vincible Ignorance good and prudent men. - does not destroy the voluntariness IGNORANCE OF THE LAW of an act. - The agent has knowledge which - excuses no one if and only if one is bears indirectly upon the act which invincibly ignorant. he performs in ignorance, and the act has, in consequence, at least Downloaded by Rory Horowitz ([email protected])  lOMoARcPSD|45536012 indirect voluntariness, and is a Example: The automa琀椀c feeling of awe human act imputable to the agent. over a wonderful scenery. c. Vincible Ignorance lessens the b. Consequent voluntariness of an act. - when these passions are directly or - While vincible ignorance does not indirectly s琀椀rred up or fostered by destroy the voluntariness of an act, the will. it lessens voluntariness, and Example: Ge琀 ng angry on the teacher diminishes the responsibility of the retained for a long 琀椀me. agent. From the descrip琀椀ons men琀椀oned, d. A昀昀ected Ignorance in one way antecedent concupiscence is an act of lessens and, in another way, man, and not a human act; it is a non- increases voluntariness. voluntary act, and the agent is not responsible for it while consequent - Despite the bad will which it implies, concupiscence is the fault of the agent, it is s琀椀ll lack of knowledge, direct for it is willed, either directly or and perfect, and lessens the indirectly, i.e., either in se or causa, and voluntariness of the act that thus, the agent, as a result, is proceeds from it. responsible for it. - If being deliberately fostered to serve as an excuse for sin against a Ethical Principles on law, it shows the strength of the Concupiscence will's determina琀椀on to You sent persist in such sins, thus, increases a. Antecedent Concupiscence the voluntariness of an act that proceeds from it. lessens the voluntariness of an act. - disturbs the mind and hinders the 2. CONCUPISCENCE calm judgment of the mind upon the moral quali琀椀es of an act, thus, - It refers to those bodily appe琀椀tes or impairing knowledge needed for tendencies which are called perfect voluntariness. passions, viz., love, hatred, joy, grief, desire, horror, hope, despair, - It is a strong and sudden urge to courage or daring, fear, and anger It ac琀椀on, and thus it lessens the full can be classi昀椀ed into and prompt control which the will must exercise perfectly, hence, it a. Antecedent impairs freedom. Since knowledge and freedom are impaired by it, the - when these passions spring into voluntariness of an act is thereby ac琀椀on uns琀椀mulated by the will-act. lessened, and in consequence, Downloaded by Rory Horowitz ([email protected])  lOMoARcPSD|45536012 diminishes responsibility of the a. From Fear agent. - when ac琀椀ons are done caused by fear b. Antecedent Concupiscence does Example: A student cheats because he is not destroy the voluntariness of afraid of failing. an act. b. With Fear - Although knowledge and freedom are lessened by it, they are not - when fear is the accompanying destroyed; and the agent's circumstance in doing an act responsibility, while diminished, is Example: A student chea琀椀ng is afraid of not cancelled. being caught. - If the antecedent passion is so great as to make control of the agent's Ethical Principle on Fear acts impossible, then the agent is temporarily insane, and his acts are a. An act done from fear, however not human acts but acts of man. great, is simply voluntary, although it is regularly c. Consequent Concupiscence, Involuntary also condi琀椀onally however great, does not involuntary. voluntariness of an act. - Fear does not excuse an evil act - lessen the Consequent which springs from it concupiscence is willed, directly or - The law of Church and State indirectly, thus, the acts that provides that an act done from grave proceed from it have their proper fear, unjustly su昀昀ered, and excited voluntariness. In the principle on directly in order to force the agent to concupiscence, no one is excused do an act that is against his will, is an except if one is experiencing invalid act or one that may be insanity. invalidated. In the principle on fear, no one is excused except when 3. FEAR under the in昀氀uence of life and death situa琀椀ons. - It is the shrinking back of the mind from danger. 4. VIOLENCE - It is the anxiety or worry of mind, from slight disturbance to actual - It is the external force applied by a panic, brought about by the free cause that is, by human beings apprehension of imminent or for the purpose of compelling a coming evil. person to perform an act which is against his will. It may be classi昀椀ed Downloaded by Rory Horowitz ([email protected])  lOMoARcPSD|45536012 Ethical Principle on Violence a. Acts elicited by the will are not subject to violence; external acts caused by violence, to which due to resistance is o昀昀ered, are in no wise imputable to the agent. In the principle on violence, one is excused from the result of an ac琀椀on, under the in昀氀uence of violence, done against the will. 5. HABIT - refers to opera琀椀ve habit, which is a las琀椀ng readiness and facility - born of frequently repeated acts, for ac琀椀ng in a certain manner. Ethical Principle on Habit a. Habit does not destroy voluntariness; acts from habit are always voluntary, at least in cause, as long as the habit is allowed to endure. In the principle on habit, no one is excused from an ac琀椀on done in habit. Downloaded by Rory Horowitz ([email protected])  lOMoARcPSD|45536012 a. Divine Reason / Eternal Law - the ul琀椀mate norm b. Human Reason / Conscience Lesson 4 and 5: - the proximate norm MORALITY OF HUMAN ACTS AND ITS DETERMINANTS Human acts are good or evil in as much as they agree or con昀氀ict with Divine Reason.  MORALITY ON HUMAN ACTS Conscience is the judgment of human reason recognizing and MORALITY applying the Eternal Law in human acts. - Is described as the quality of human acts which leads us to call some as Divine Reason comes from St. Thomas good or evil (not good). Aquinas, an acclaimed doctor of the church. a. A thing is good in as much as it can answer a tendency, appe琀椀te or desire, otherwise its evil. - Human Reason doesn't con昀氀ict b. In Ethics, we consider moral good or with Divine Reason evil. - Human Reason is a shadow of Divine Reason, a re昀氀ec琀椀on of the - A human act always has a last end existence of the Divine Reason- towards which it tends. Plato a. Objec琀椀vely, The end is the From what has been said, morality can SUMMUM BONUM ( greatest god), now be de昀椀ned strictly as the rela琀椀on of the limitless good god. human acts to their norm. b. Subjec琀椀vely, the end is the perfect happiness in the possession of the SUMMUM BONUM. Furthermore, morality is also de昀椀ned as that quality or property of a human act Thus, human acts are good in as much as whereby it measures up to what it they serve to carry the agent towards should be as a step towards the the a琀琀ainment of this end, otherwise, it objec琀椀ve last end of human ac琀椀on, or is not good or evil. fails so to measure up. Norms (Standard) of Morality Downloaded by Rory Horowitz ([email protected])  lOMoARcPSD|45536012 Measuring up or failing to measure up is - This refers to the agent's personal called the agreement or the con昀氀ict inten琀椀ons or wishes to be between the human act and the norm, achieved by the act over and which is reason. above what it naturally tends to. Conscience is the dicta琀椀ng faculty to It is the end of the agent. determine if a human act is moral, - An act which is good in itself may immoral, or amoral. s琀椀ll be evil by the reason of the agent's mo琀椀ve for which it is Determinants of Morality done but an act which is evil in itself cannot be made good by - These determinants will decide reason of the end for which it is whether a human act measures performed. up or does not measure up to the norm of morality. Ethical Principles Governing Mo琀椀ve a. A good act done for a good - There are three determinants of mo琀椀ve becomes be琀琀er, it will morality, and the human act to be become best if done for several morally good must be in good mo琀椀ves. agreement with the norm of b. An evil act done for an evil end morality on all these three; it is becomes worse it will become evil if it does not agree with any worst if done for several evil of the three. mo琀椀ves. c. A good act done for an evil end, is - They are object, the mo琀椀ve, and en琀椀rely evil if the end is the the circumstances. whole mo琀椀ve of the act. d. An evil act can never become a. THE OBJECT good by reason of a good end. e. An indi昀昀erent act becomes good - This refers to the act itself, the if done for a good end, and evil if deed done or to be done. performed for an evil end. - There are certain acts that intrinsically good or evil. Venial Sins vs. Mortal Sins. Heinous - The morality of indi昀昀erent acts is Crimes vs. Less/Non-Heinous Acts determined by the end (mo琀椀ve) for which it is done and the "The end doesn't jus琀椀fy the means.” circumstances which a昀昀ect it. - Universal Principle b. THE MOTIVE c. THE CIRCUMSTANCES Downloaded by Rory Horowitz ([email protected])  lOMoARcPSD|45536012 - They are the condi琀椀ons that This is similar to the second determinant a昀昀ect an act and may a昀昀ect it Principles morally, although they do not belong to the essence of the act as such - Seven circumstances can be given: Who, What, Where, With Ethical Circumstances Governing What Ally (Means). How, When, a. An indi昀昀erent act becomes good and Why or evil by reason of its circumstances. Circumstance of Person (WHO) b. A good act may become evil by Who is the agent? To whom is the act reason of circumstances. done? c. A good or evil act may become be琀琀er or worse by reason of Circumstance of Quality or Quan琀椀ty circumstances and may even of an Act (WHAT) become best or worst from its What is the extent of the act? Was the circumstances. injury slight or serious? Was the amount d. An evil act can never be made stolen large or small? good by circumstances. e. A gravely evil circumstance Circumstance of Place (WHERE) destroys the en琀椀re goodness of a Where did the act take place? good act. f. A circumstance which is not Circumstance of Means (WITH WHAT gravely evil does not en琀椀rely ALLY) destroy the goodness of a good What is used in the performance of the act. act? Circumstance of Manner (HOW) How did the agent perform the act? Was he in good or bad faith? Was his evil disposi琀椀on intensely malicious or only slightly so? Circumstance of Time (WHEN) How long did the agent retain an evil thought long period or momentarily? Circumstance of the End of the Agent (WHY) Downloaded by Rory Horowitz ([email protected])