1. CHAPTER 6
MORALITY AND ACTION

2. INTRODUCTION The human life compared to a painting on a canvas
The sins of Adam and Eve
a) They chose not to serve God
b) They decided what was supposedly good or evil
Oscar Wilde’s “The Picture of Dorian Gray”

3. 1. Human Acts
It is good to remind ourselves that only humans are capable of making moral choices.
This is made possible through the intellect and will.
We must make a distinction between human acts and the acts of humans.
Human acts are all acts that involve intellect and will; could be good or evil.
Acts of humans are: breathing, sneezing, and actions such as those.

4. 2. Components of the Moral Choice
Morally good actions have certain requirements. To be able to determine in all cases whether a choice being considered is moral, it is necessary to understand what is meant by the object, the intention, and the circumstances of a particular action.

5. A. The Object
Objects of moral choices are the actions done. There are some actions which are always immoral, so they may never be done.
The object is the matter of a human act or the action itself. The object determines the morality of an act.
Ex. Adultery is always evil by its object, independently of the purpose of the one who does it. So, when the moral object is in itself an absolute evil, the action in question is an intrinsically evil act.

6. B. The Intention or End
The intention refers to the motive for which an act is done. Bad intentions can change good acts into sinful actions. A bad intention has the power to change the result into something evil. Actions which have both an evil object and an evil intention increase the malice (seriousness
of sin).
On the other hand, a good intention can reduce the guilt of a morally bad act, but it cannot make an intrinsically evil act a good act.

7. C. Circumstances
The word circumstance comes from the Latin circum-stare, which means “what stands around”.
They are those factors that occur with the act and that contribute to the morality of the act.
Another way to explain the circumstances
is to say they describe each particular moral choice. Circumstances ask who, what, where, why, how, and when.

8. Cont…
Circumstances can change the morality of particular acts. Sometimes they can make what would be a venial sin a mortal sin. Actions which are evil in every instance, i.e. abortion and getting drunk, are called intrinsically evil acts.
The word intrinsically indicates they are evil from the very nature of the act. These acts are always wrong regardless of the circumstances.

9. 3. The Principle of Double Effect
Some acts have the potential to result in both good and evil effects. In certain situations, it is permissible to perform a good action while permitting a consequential evil result. This section sets down the conditions which must be met for such a situation to be moral.

10. a. The action must be good in itself or at least indifferent
An intrinsically evil action like abortion is never permissible, even if it has a good effect, because abortion is always evil in itself.

11. b. The agent must have the right intention
The good effect must be directly intended, and the evil effect, although foreseen, must not be intended but only permitted or tolerated.
One must never directly intend evil; rather one allows the evil to occur because it cannot be separated from the good intended.

12. c. The evil effect cannot be the means to the good effect
The god effect must be the direct result of the action taken, since the end does not justify the means.

13. d. The good effect must balance the evil effect.
When there is a foreseeable evil effect of an action, there must be a proportionately grave reason for action.
Consider the example…

14. 4. Objectivity of good and evil
The denial of the existence of objective truth has become quite commonplace over the last five centuries. This has led to a denial of moral absolutes. It can often be heard today in arguments, “You have your truth and I have mine.” However, truth cannot be in conflict with itself and it is this mentality that leads to a relativistic attitude about morality, which in turn leads to the denial of the existence of intrinsically evil acts.

15. The Historical Argument for Moral Objectivity
There are no rational beings who can look back on history and say that the Holocaust was just. Likewise, none could say that the actions of Mother Teresa were selfish and cruel. No matter how much someone tries to convince himself or herself that all things are subjective, there are definite elements of human nature that all people bear witness to.

16. 6. Some Errors Derived from Ethical Relativism
Three types:
1. Situation Ethics
2. Consequentialism
3. Proportionalism

17. 1. Situation Ethics
The denial of objective moral truth results in several erroneous attitudes or mindsets. One of these is situation ethics. Situation ethics is a mentality that essentially focuses around not hurting anybody. A proponent of this mentality would postulate that if your actions do not cause physical harm to someone, then they are morally acceptable.

18. Continued…
Supporters of situation ethics usually restrict their objections to laws relating to the sixth commandment, saying that sins against this commandment “don’t hurt anyone.” It is rare to find a situationist arguing for the right to steal, however, because stealing clearly hurts someone.

19. 2. Consequentialism
Consequentialism is another erroneous attitude. According to consequentialism, we should try to avoid totally evil actions when we can, but if good effects can be produced, the action may be permitted. The problem with this idea is that it leads to immediate and complete
subjectivism because the person acting will always be deciding for himself what is permissible in different situations.

20. Continued…
Once this occurs there is no longer any notion of right or wrong and consequentialism becomes no different from complete amorality.

21. 3. Proportionalism
A third erroneous attitude is proportionalism. Proportionalism argues that there can be proportional goods which outweigh the evil of an act. Essentially, it maintains that if the good that results from an act is greater than the evil put into the act, than the act is justified.

22. Continued…
Like consequentialism, proportionalism is a mentality that completely denies objective moral truth and results in immediate subjectivity. The danger in these erroneous attitudes is that they appear to have a rational basis. In reality, however, the basis for such ideas is usually contingent on how one feels in a particular situation.

23. Continued…
Human emotion is far too volatile to be the basis for moral decisions. Unfortunately, decisions that only involve human emotion usually result in the choosing of the most selfish option. For a
closer look at these false mentalities, see Veritatis Splendor, the encyclical written by
Pope John Paul II in 1993.