ETHICS PRELIM.pdf

Moral and Non-Moral Moral and Non-moral Standards (SHEN) “Why the need to distinguish moral standards from non-moral ones?” - Different societies have different moral beliefs, and that our own beliefs are greatly influenced by our o...

Moral and Non-Moral Moral and Non-moral Standards (SHEN) “Why the need to distinguish moral standards from non-moral ones?” - Different societies have different moral beliefs, and that our own beliefs are greatly influenced by our own culture and context. Some values do have moral implications, while others don’t. - Different cultures have different moral standards. What is a matter of moral indifference, that is, a matter of taste in one culture may be a matter of moral significance in another. [ Note ! The danger here is that one culture may impose its own cultural standards on others, which may result in a clash in cultural values and beliefs. When this happens, violence and crime may ensue, such as religious violence and ethnic cleansing. ] Moral Standards - Are norms that individuals or groups have about the kinds of actions believed to be morally right or wrong, as well as the values placed on what we believed to be morally good or morally bad. - MORAL STANDARDS normally promote “the good’, that is, the welfare and well-being of humans as well as the animals and the environment. - Moral standards therefore prescribe what humans ought to do in terms of rights and obligations. - According to scholars, moral standards are the sum of combined norms and values. NORMS + VALUES = MORAL STANDARDS. Norms are general rules about our actions or behaviors. Values, on the other hand, are enduring beliefs about what is good or not. Characteristics of Moral Standards 1. Deals with matters we think can seriously injure or benefit humans, animals, and the environment.; 2. Not established or changed by the decisions of authoritative individuals or bodies; 3. Overriding, that is, they take precedence over other standards and considerations, especially of self-interest; 4. Based on impartial considerations; 5. Associated with special emotion and vocabulary the actions that we believe on what MoralStandards are is right and 5 Samples or Scenarios (Moral) wrong 1. Helping Someone in Need - You witness an elderly person struggling to carry groceries across the street. Even though you're in a hurry, you decide to stop and help them. This action reflects the moral standard of kindness and compassion. 2. Telling the Truth - A friend asks for your honest opinion on an important matter. Even though you know the truth might hurt their feelings, you choose to be honest because you value integrity and believe it's the right thing to do. 3. Keeping a Promise - You promised a colleague that you would help them with a project over the weekend. Despite receiving a last-minute invitation to a fun event, you stick to your promise, reflecting the moral value of trustworthiness. 4. Standing Up Against Injustice - You notice a coworker being unfairly treated or discriminated against at work. You speak up and report the incident to HR, guided by the moral principle of justice and fairness. 5. Refusing to Cheat - During an important exam, you have the opportunity to cheat and improve your score. You decide against it because you believe in honesty and want to succeed through your own efforts. Non-moral Standards - Non-moral standards refer to rules, guidelines, or principles that govern behavior or actions without directly involving questions of right or wrong, good or evil. - Refer to rules that are unrelated to moral or ethical considerations. Either these standards are not necessarily linked to morality or by nature lack ethical sense - These standards are based on practical, cultural, legal, or social considerations rather than moral judgments. Non moral Sfandards are a set of rules without the involvement; Characteristics of Non-moral of moral judgements 1. They are ethically neutral and don't involve judgments of right or wrong. 2. They are based on cultural practices or social norms. 3. These standards are specific to the context or environment in which they are applied. 4. They focus on practicality, aiming for functionality, order, or efficiency. 5. Some are grounded in legal requirements or regulations. 6. They are not universal and can vary across different cultures and groups. 5 Samples or Scenarios (Non-moral) 1. Dress Code at Work - You work in an office that requires business casual attire. Although there's no moral implication, you follow the dress code to maintain professionalism. 2. Using Formal Language in a Business Email - When writing an email to a client, you use formal language and proper grammar. This is a non-moral standard related to professionalism and effective communication.  3. Standing in Line at a Bank - You wait your turn in line at the bank because it's the standard procedure. This behavior is based on social norms and order, not moral judgment. 4. Adhering to Traffic Rules - You stop at a red light while driving, following traffic rules. This action is about ensuring safety and order on the road, not a moral decision. 5. Observing Quiet Hours in a Library - You keep your voice low in a library to adhere to the quiet hours policy. This standard helps maintain a conducive environment for study, but it doesn't involve a moral choice. Moral standards and non-moral standards differ in their normativity and functions. Moral standards, such as those related to ethical conduct, are demanding in nature and impose obligations on individuals. They provide a framework for evaluating actions as right or wrong, and guide individuals in making moral decisions. On the other hand, non- moral standards, such as rationality, are recommended in nature and suggest actions that are beneficial or optimal. They serve as guidelines for practical decision-making, but do not carry the same moral weight as moral standards. While moral standards are based on principles that assign moral status to actions, non-moral standards focus on achieving desired outcomes. Understanding the differences between these two types of standards is important for comprehending the complexities of moral decision-making and ethical behavior in various contexts. Moral standards are principles or guidelines that define right and wrong behavior, particularly in terms of human conduct and its impact on others. These standards are typically based on philosophical, religious, or societal values and norms. In contrast, non-moral standards are guidelines or criteria that have no direct bearing on moral or ethical considerations. These standards may be technical, practical, or aesthetic in nature. For example, a moral standard might be "Do not lie or deceive others." This standard is based on the ethical principle of honesty and the belief that lying can harm others. On the other hand, a non-moral standard could be "Maintain a clean and organized work environment." This standard is not related to moral considerations but rather to practical and aesthetic concerns. Another example: the moral standard of "Respect the rights and dignity of all people" is based on the ethical principle of human rights and the belief that all individuals deserve to be treated with respect, regardless of their individual characteristics or circumstances. In contrast, a non-moral standard might be "Wear appropriate attire for a formal business meeting," which is based on social and professional norms rather than moral considerations. The key distinction is that moral standards are fundamentally about what is right or wrong, good or bad, in terms of human behavior and its impact on others, while non-moral standards are more focused on practical, technical, or aesthetic considerations. CHAPTER ONE ETHICS: Its Meaning , Nature and Scope OBJECTIVES 1. Define and explain the nature and scope of ethics as a philosophical discipline; 2. Articulate the importance of studying ethics; 3. Discuss and distinguish the different norms or standards pertaining to right and wrong/good or bad; 4. Describe the moral dimension of human existence; and 5. Identify the various characteristics of moral principles.  Ethics Morality ▶ Greek word = “ethos” Meaning ▶ Latin Word = “mos” or “mores” Customary behavior Meaning customary behavior ▶ Ethics = word/Theory ▶ Morality = flesh/action ▶ Ethics outlines theories of right and ▶ Morality is the doing or practice of wrong and good or bad actions ethics ▶ Ethics is the systematic study of the ▶ Morality is the rightness or rightness and wrongness of human wrongness of human actions actions ▶ Morality is the practice of ethics ▶ The science of “morals” ETHICS : A PHILOSOPHY OF ACTION *The learning of ethics does not actually guarantee morality on the person’s concrete and practical conduct and behavior. * ethics and morality truly need and complement each other ETHICS : A PRACTICAL DISCIPLINE *Ethics should be taken not just as an academic study, but as fundamentally, a “way of life.” *Knowing what is right without actually changing the way we behave morally is nothing but useless knowledge ETHICS : IMPORTANCE OF STUDYING ETHICS *It is said, “without moral perception, man is only an animal. Without morality, man as a rational [and free] being is a failure” (Agapay 1991:3). *If one does NOT have a sense of morality , of what is right and wrong in relation to their conduct and behavior, people and society in general would naturally and expectedly deteriorate and collapsed. * Every corporations and organizations there is always that code of ethics.  not all THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ETHICS legals are moral AND LAW actions the same thing can also be said to moral *Legality is not identical with morality. What is legal is actions not always moral and also, what is moral is not always legal. Laws = public actions * laws are only concerned with “public” actions Ethics= Private actions and *Ethics goes beyond the concern and parameters of law, the human for it includes private actions and the human motivations mutruation and intentions of its actions and intention THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ETHICS AND LAW *Laws, more often than not, are decided by a majority vote. *Morality is not all about how many people say that something is good or bad, right or wrong. It is much deeper than that. What is right is right even though no one is doing it. Wrong is wrong even if everybody is doing it. *Ethics serves as the very foundation of Ethics serves as a foundation our laws. of our laws THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN ETHICS AND RELIGION *Ethics as a philosophical discipline, as mentioned, solely relies on natural reason, logic and experience, especially in the justification and validation of certain theories and principles concerning good and bad. *Religion, on the other hand, relies primarily and mainly on supernatural reason, that is divine revelation or divine authority. Ethics solely relies on natural reason logic and experience Religion relies on supernatural reasons SO, WHAT IS ETHICS? *Philosophically, Ethics is defined as the practical science of the morality of human act or conduct and of the good life. * As a science, Ethics is a body of knowledge systematically arranged and presented in such manner that it arrives at its conclusions coherently and logically. MATERIAL AND FORMAL OBJECTS OF ETHICS *the material object of ethics is human conduct or the human act - Human conduct refers to the act that is done by a human person which he/she is conscious of, which proceeds from one’s deliberation and freewill, and thus, for which one is held morally responsible. *FORMAL OBJECT OF ETHICS is the morality or the moral rectitude of human act or human conduct. - Ethics deals with the human person’s right conduct, whether his/her actions conform to right reason which is the immediate norm of morality. NORM *A norm is here understood as a rule, standard, or measure. Specifically, it is something by which an act or conduct is measured as good or bad, right or wrong, moral or immoral. *by norm of morality, we mean the standard of right and wrong in human actions. TYPES OF NORMS 1. Technical Norm – “This refers mainly to man’s needs which come from his bodily space-time limitations. This norm has to do with survival, health and well- being. It is concerned with problems of effecting change, of transforming the natural world, the problems of coping with natural forces…. every community prescribes certain proper ways of working and doing things. For example, there are the ‘right’ way of preparing the field for planting rice, the ‘correct’ way of constructing the roof of a house, house hold chores, how to assemble things etc. Technical Norm refers to man's need TYPES OF NORMS 2. Societal Norm – “This norm has something to do with the need for group cohesion and for strengthening the bonds that keep the community together. example, certain manners or attire, certain ways of speaking or of conducting oneself, certain rituals and ceremonies are considered ‘proper’ and ‘fitting,’ ‘appropriate’ or ‘recommended,’ because they maintain and strengthen the bonds that keep the community together. TYPES OF NORMS 2. Societal Norm Example – “knock first before you open the door,” “one should not pick one’s nose in public,” “it’s not right to talk that way in the presence of visitors,” “one must not talk while one’s mouth is full,” “one ought to follow the rituals set forth by her fraternity when it comes to accepting new members.” These and other similar examples belong to the category of etiquette or what is known as “GMRC” TYPES OF NORMS 3. Aesthetic Norm – “This refers to typical perceptual forms regarding color, shape, space, movement, sound, feeling and emotion, touch and texture, taste, scent and odor…which are considered by the community as ‘ennobling,’ ‘cathartic,’ ‘heightening man’s existence,’ or ‘beautiful,’ because they represent a certain free play and celebration of the human spirit.” examples: “relegious music is good,” “the latest corona virus movie is bad,” “the food of foodpanda is terrible,” “Leonardo da Vinci’s painting is admirable,” “the color of my ethics teacher’s hair is disgraceful,” “my female students’ styles of dressing are obnoxious,” “Vice Ganda’s fashion sense is simply outrageous,” “President Duterte’s manner of speaking is utterly disgusting.” TYPES OF NORMS 4. Ethical or Moral Norm – “The moral or ethical norm refers to some ideal vision of [a human person], an ideal stage or perfection of [his/her being], which serves as the ultimate goal and norm. In This norm, the human person and its actions are judged to be right or wrong, good or bad Because of this ideal vision of what a human person should be. CHARACTERISTICS OF MORAL PRICIPLE 1.Reasonability – moral judgments must be backed by good reasons or arguments. something is right if it is “reasonable.” If it does not appeal to reason and common sense/experience, then it has to be viewed with suspicion and reservation. CHARACTERISTICS OF MORAL PRICIPLE 2. Impartiality - This means that an ethical or moral rule should be neutral when it comes to the question as to who are its recipients. Moral standards are supposed to apply to everyone regardless of one’s status and situation in life. To be impartial is to treat everyone alike, no one gets special treatment or favoritism. CHARACTERISTICS OF MORAL PRICIPLE 3. Prescriptivity This refers to the practical, or action- guiding nature of morality. This is also the commanding aspect of morality. Moral principles are generally put forth as some kind of commands or imperatives. Examples of this are : “Do not kill,” “Do no harm to your fellowmen,” “Love your neighbor,” “Do not steal,” “Tell the truth,” CHARACTERISTICS OF MORAL PRINCIPLE 4. Overridingness Moral standards must have hegemony. This means that they should reign supreme over all the other standards or norms of valuation, whatever they may be. They have predominant authority and override other kinds of principles. whenever there is a conflict between the moral norm and any other norm, the moral must prevail. morality over legality; morality over technicality; people over dogma. CHARACTERISTICS OF MORAL PRINCIPLE 5.Autonomous from Arbitrary Authority Moral standards should stand on their own logic independent of the arbitrariness of the majority. What is right is right even though no one is doing it. Wrong is wrong even if everybody is doing it. CHARACTERISTICS OF MORAL PRINCIPLE 6. Publicity - This means that moral rules and principles must be made public if they are to serve as clear guidelines to our actions. The obvious reason for this is that principles are made and promulgated to render advice as well as assign praise or blame to certain behaviors. For one cannot be made morally accountable for something which one truly does not know. Keeping them in secret defeats the very purpose why they are created. You do not hide something that you really think is genuinely good and noble.  CHARACTERISTICS OF MORAL PRINCIPLE 7. Practicability - Moral rules should not be impossible to achieve or else they are not for men but for angels. They must be “workable,” and not “too idealistic.” Ethical standards must not be over what an ordinary human being is capable of doing. Characteristicsaf Moral Principle Universal Publicity Prescrivity overindingness Autonomous Reasonability Practical Impartiality CHARACTERISTICS OF MORAL PRINCIPLE 8. Universalizability – A moral rule or principle must be applicable to everyone, without exception, provided of course that all people are in a relevantly similar situation or context. “If I judge that an act is right or wrong for a certain person, then the act is right or wrong for any other relevantly similar person. the Golden Rule: “Do unto others what you want others to do unto to you, THE MORALITY OF HUMAN ACTS AND MORAL ACOUNTABILITY  DEFINITION OF HUMAN ACTS AND ACTS OF MAN Human acts (actus humani) are those actions done by a person in a certain situation which are essentially the result of his/her conscious knowledge, freedom and voluntariness. Acts of man - are actions which happen in the person “naturally”, even without his/her awareness of himself/herself while doing them. These actions are done without deliberation, reflection and consent. Human acts = concious actions Acts of man unconscious actions “all human acts are acts of man, but not all acts of man are human acts” Acts of man, therefore, are those that humans share with animals These things are performed without deliberation and free will. The person here is neither morally responsible nor accountable for these kinds of actions. BASIC ELEMENTS OF HUMAN ACTS 1.) The act must be deliberate. It must be performed by a conscious agent who is very much aware of what he/she is doing and of its consequences good or evil. 2.) The act must be performed in freedom. It must be done by an agent who is acting freely, with his/her own volition and powers. Human Acts must be deliberate performed by a conscious agent freedom - Act must be performed in BASIC ELEMENTS OF HUMAN ACTS 3.) The act must be done voluntarily. It must be performed by an agent who decides willfully to perform the act. The act, to be truly a voluntary one, must come from the core of a person’s being. Human acts are voluntarily MAJOR DETERMINANTS OF THE MORALITY OF HUMAN ACT 1. The Act Itself or the Object of the Act *The action that is done or performed by an agent *It is WHAT the person does. *This is “the substance of the moral act” 2.The Motive or the Intention *The motive is the purpose or intention of which something is done. *It is the reason behind our acting. *It answers the question “WHY the person does what he does?” *One normally performs an act as a means to achieve an end or goal, THE FOUR PRINCIPLES OF MOTIVES OR INTENTION 1. An indifferent act can become morally good or morally evil depending upon the intention of the person doing the act. - Speaking/Talking is good or bad…. depending on the intention of your talking/speaking ‘….to voice your idea or you destroy someone’s reputation 2. An objectively good act becomes morally evil due to a wrong or bad motive. - Helping or praying is good but it will become evil depending on the intention (election or curse) 3. An intrinsically (objectively) morally good act can receive added goodness, if done with an equally noble intention or motive. - Helping or praying is better when you pray for peace, give thanks to the Lord for the graces you received, or glorify HIM. THE FOUR PRINCIPLES OF MOTIVES OR INTENTION 4. An intrinsically evil act can never become morally good even if it is done with a good motive or intention. - Robinhood is stealing to help the poor -Cheating to pass the board exam -Killing the drug Lord THE END SHOULD ALWAYS JUSTIFY THE MEAN…. THE MEAN SHOULD ALWAYS JUSTIFY END.. THE CIRCUMSTANCES The moral goodness or badness of an act is determined not only by the object or act itself, plus the motive or intention of the moral agent, but also on the circumstances or situation surrounding the performance of the action. Circumstances refer to the various conditions outside of the act. They are not, strictly speaking, part and parcel of the act itself. Circumstances are conditions that influence, to a lesser or greater degree, the moral quality of the human act. FOUR TYPES OF CIRCUMSTANCES 1.Mitigating or extenuating circumstances It diminishes the degree of moral good or evil in an act. To kill an innocent person is homicide or murder. circumstances lessen the severity of the act and its punishment. Diminishes the degree of the action whether they are good or bad FOUR TYPES OF CIRCUMSTANCES 2. Aggravating circumstances it increases the degree of moral good or evil The same act of murder can be made worse if it is carried out at night and with the use of superior arms by a known recidivist. Increases the degree of the action whether they are good or · ad FOUR TYPES OF CIRCUMSTANCES 3.Justifying circumstances It shows adequate reason for some acts done. A person charged with murder can vindicate himself/herself if he/she can prove that he/she killed a superior aggressor and that he/she did so in defense of his/her own life. (Hold up, robbery) Artifiestheactionwhethits go a onse FOUR TYPES OF CIRCUMSTANCES ↑ 4. Specifying circumstances It gives a new and distinct species of moral good or evil of the act. The moral quality of the act of murder changes if the murderer is wife of the victim, or if the murderer and the victim are one and the same. the circumstances which served as a reason for it, render it worthy of approval or condemnation. SEVEN KINDS OF CIRCUMSTANCES These circumstances will affect the morality of human action 1. Who - the person who does or receives the action. * Status, Position, Education, Age, Illiterate, Out of school Youth, Gangster who did the action SEVEN KINDS OF CIRCUMSTANCES 2. WHERE – is the setting of an action. Every act is done in a particular place. Where the action happened * Is the act done inside the house, street, way going home, etc 3. BY WHAT MEANS – Intentional or accident? By what means : intentional or accidental Is there any use of force, compulsion, threats, coercion, intimidation, embarrassing words, lewd remarks, vulgar statements, insensitive comments? SEVEN KINDS OF CIRCUMSTANCES 4. WHY – is the intention or the motive that moves the agent to an action. (#2 determinants of the morality of human act) done Why the action is It answers the question “WHY the person does what he does?” 5. HOW – (By what means) This circumstance also involves different conditions or modalities such as voluntariness, consent, violence, fear, ignorance. How the action is done It also includes the particular weapon/equipment/tools/gadgets/etc. that the person used or employed in the performance of the act. Was the action performed in “cold blood,” “in a painful manner,” “in a very brutal way (as in torture),” “maliciously,” etc.? SEVEN KINDS OF CIRCUMSTANCES 6. WHEN –Every act is done at a particular and specific time. The element of time is also important and even vital as to the moral assessment and judgment of the human act. When the action happened Was the act performed in broad daylight or was it done during nighttime? Was it committed when the victim was in the act of praying or while asleep and unaware? SEVEN KINDS OF CIRCUMSTANCES 7. TO WHOM—refers to the recipient of the action, or the person to whom the act is done. (refer to # 1- The who) to whom of the action recipient PRINCIPLE GOVERNING CIRCUMSTANCES 1. Circumstances may either increase or decrease the wrongfulness of an evil act. 2. Circumstances may either increase or decrease the merits of a good act. 3. Circumstances may exempt temporarily someone from doing a required act. 4. Circumstances do not prove the guilt of a person. The presence of a person when a crime is committed does not prove he is the criminal when a crime is committed. MODIFIERS OF HUMAN ACTS These modifiers, accordingly, “affect human acts in the essential qualities of knowledge, freedom, voluntariness, and so make them less perfectly human’ (Glenn 1965: 25). 1. Ignorance is the absence of necessary knowledge which a person in a given situation, who is performing a certain act, ought to have. Ignorance therefore is a negative thing for it is a negation of knowledge. MODIFIERS OF HUMAN ACTS 1.1 Vincible Ignorance can easily be remedied through ordinary diligence and reasonable efforts on the part of the person who is in this particular mental state. This specific type of ignorance is therefore conquerable since it is correctible. Medical practitioner Absent student learn /useful but choose important not to something - MODIFIERS OF HUMAN ACTS 1.2 Invincible ignorance is the kind of ignorance which an individual may have without being aware of it, or, having knowledge of it, simply lacks the necessary means to correct and solve it. This type of ignorance is unconquerable, and thus not correctible Restaurant – waiter and chef School – student and parent moral truth rafurs to action where a is unaware of certain person - an or laws reasonable effort - this action cannot be corrected through - actions you are not aware that they are wrong MODIFIERS OF HUMAN ACTS 1.3 Affected vincible ignorance This is the kind of ignorance which an individual keeps by positive efforts in order to escape blame and accountability. Student ignores the text of the class president Person deliberately maintains to avoid responsibility for their - actions actively choosing to uninformed about certain facts - or remain laws PRINCIPLES GOVERNING IGNORANCE A. Invincible ignorance renders an act involuntary. A person cannot be held morally responsible or liable if he or she is not aware of the state of his or her ignorance. B. Vincible ignorance does not destroy, but lessens the voluntariness and the corresponding accountability over the act. A person who becomes aware and conscious of the state of ignorance he or she is in the moral obligation to correct it by employing enough diligence in finding the information required to make one’s ignorance disappear. “To act with vincible ignorance is to act imprudently.” PRINCIPLES GOVERNING IGNORANCE C. Affected or pretended ignorance does not excuse a person from his/her bad actions; on the contrary it actually increases their malice. This specific kind of ignorance happens when a person really wants and chooses to be ignorant so that he/she can eventually escape any accountability arising from the wrongfulness of the act later on. MODIFIERS OF HUMAN ACTS 2. Passion or Concupiscence Passion or concupiscence is a strong or powerful feeling or emotion. Positive emotions – love, desire, delight, hope and bravery Negative emotions - hatred, despair, horror, sadness, anger, grief and the like. MODIFIERS OF HUMAN ACTS According to St. Thomas Aquinas, In themselves passions are indifferent; they are not evil…inasmuch as they are the movements of the irrational appetite, have no moral good or evil in themselves. But if they are subject to the reason and will, then moral good and evil are in them. God has endowed the human person with these appetites which pervade his/her whole sensitive life. They are instruments and means for self- preservation of the individual and the human race. Every person needs them for self-defense, growth, and improvement. The saints and Christ Himself expressed their passions (as cited in Salibay 2008: 40). MODIFIERS OF HUMAN ACTS Passions are either classified as antecedent or consequent. 1. Antecedent are those that precede an act. It may happen that a person is emotionally aroused to perform an act. - heightened human emotions 2. Consequent – are those that are intentionally aroused and kept. of thr action consequence - MODIFIERS OF HUMAN ACTS Principle governing Antecedent Passions – do not always destroy voluntariness but they diminish accountability for the resultant act. Principle governing Consequent Passion – Consequent passions do not lessen voluntariness, but may even increase accountability. Here, the person concerned who willfully acts following his/her passion, allows himself/herself to be completely controlled by it and hence, is considered morally responsible for it. MODIFIERS OF HUMAN ACTS 3. Fear Fear is defined as “the disturbance of the mind of a person who is confronted by an impending danger or harm to himself or loved ones” (Agapay2008: 36-37 Here, it is treated as a “special kind” of passion, and hence also treated as another distinct modifier of human act since it is a kind of a test of one’s mental character. MODIFIERS OF HUMAN ACTS Principles governing Fear 1. Acts done “with” fear are voluntary. This is so since the person acting with fear is acting in spite of his/her fear, and thus, still very much in control of his/her conduct. Therefore the person concerned remains morally responsible of his/her action, whether good or bad, right or wrong. Example: Cheating, Stealing MODIFIERS OF HUMAN ACTS Principles governing Fear 2. Acts done “because of” intense fear or panic are simply involuntary. A person when acting out of extreme fear is not morally accountable of his/her action or conduct. A good example is a cashier who hands the money to a robber who is poking a gun on his/her head is acting out of intense fear and panic, and thus, doing something involuntarily and without his/her consent. MODIFIERS OF HUMAN ACTS 4. VIOLENCE refers to any physical force exerted on a person & another free agent for the purpose of compelling said person to act against his will. * in cases where the victim gives complete resistance, the violence is classified as perfect violence * However, if the victim offers insufficient resistance, the violence classified as Imperfect violence MODIFIERS OF HUMAN ACTS Principles governing Violence When a person experiences so much fear in the face of an unjust aggressor who is armed and extremely dangerous, he or she is not held morally responsible of his or her action. 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 one’s moral integrity” (Panizo as cited in Agapay 1991:25). MODIFIERS OF HUMAN ACTS 5. Habit Habit, is a “constant and easy way of doing things acquired by the repetition of the same act” (Panizo 1964:37). MODIFIERS OF HUMAN ACTS Principles governing Habit *When a person will simply let his/her habit take control of his/her action without doing anything about it whatsoever, then we can say that he/she is morally accountable of his/her action by allowing the habit to determine his/her conduct. *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.