THE MODIFIERS OF HUMAN ACTS

By the modifiers of human acts we mean the things that may affect
human acts in the essential qualities of knowledge and freedom, and so
make them less perfectly human. Such modifiers lessen the moral
character of the human act, and consequently diminish the responsibility
of the agent. There are five modifiers of human acts that call for detailed
study: ignorance, passion, fear, violence and habit.

A. IGNORANCE - is the lack or absence of knowledge. For our purpose

here, it may be define as the absence of intellectual knowledge in man.

Kinds of Ignorance

1. Ignorance in its Object. The thing of which a person may be ignorant

is a matter of law, fact or penalty.

a. Ignorance of the Law - is the ignorance of the existence of a duty,

rule or regulation.

b. Ignorance of Fact - is ignorance of the nature or circumstances of

an act as forbidden.

c. Ignorance of Penalty - is lack of knowledge of the precise sanction

affixed to the law.

2. Ignorance in its Subject. In the person in whom it exists, ignorance is

either vincible or invincible.

a. Vincible Ignorance - (Conquerable Ignorance) ignorance that can

and should be dispelled by use of ordinary diligence. Such
ignorance is therefore, due to lack of proper diligence on the part of
the ignorant person, and his fault. Vincible Ignorance is, in
consequence, culpable ignorance ( lack or absence of knowledge
which is expected or ought to be present). There are degrees of
vincible ignorance:

i. Crass or Supine Ignorance - if it be extremely difficult to dispel

it.
 ii. Simply Vincible Ignorance - if some effort worthy the name,
but not persevering and wholehearted effort, be unsuccessfully
employed to dispel it.

iii. Affected Ignorance - if positive effort is made to retain it.

b. Invincible Ignorance - is ignorance that ordinary and proper

diligence cannot dispel it. This sort of ignorance is attributable to
one of two causes, namely: either the person in whom the
ignorance exists has no realization whatever of his lack of
knowledge, or the person who realizes his ignorance finds
ineffective his effort to dispel it. Hence, invicible ignorance is
never the fault of the person in whom it exist, and it is rightly
called inculpable ignorance (lack or absence of knowledge which
is not expected or ought to be present). Invincible ignorance has
two degrees:

i. Physically Invincible - if no human effort to dispel it.

ii. Morally Invincible - when such effort as would be truly

characteristic of good and prudent men in the circumstances, is
found powerless to dispel it. In common ignorance is morally
invincible when it would be the result of total, or nearly total lack
of effort to dispel it.

3. Ignorance in its Result. Here we consider ignorance with reference to

acts performed while ignorance exists.

a. Antecedent Ignorance - is that which precedes all consent of the

will.

b. Concomitant Ignorance - is that which accompanies an act that

would have been performed even if the ignorance did not exists.

c. Consequent Ignorance - is that which follows upon an act of the

will. The will may directly affect it or supinely neglect to dispel it.

Ethical Principles Related to Ignorance

1. Invincible Ignorance destroys the voluntariness of an act.

2. Vincible Ignorance does not destroy the voluntariness of an act.

 3. Vincible Ignorance lessens the voluntariness of an act.

4. Affected Ignorance in one way lessens and in another way

increases voluntariness of an act.

Negative Ignorance - the absence of knowledge that is not

ought to be present.

Privative Ignorance - the absence of knowledge that ought to be

present.

Ignorance has, indeed, a positive aspect when it consists not

merely in the absence of knowledge, but in the presence of what is
falsely supposed to be knowledge. Such positive ignorance is called
mistake or error.

B. PASSIONS OR CONCUPISCENCE - those bodily appetites or tendencies

which are enumerated as follows:

1. Love - is a tendency towards a desirable good, which is either

present or absent.

2. Hatred - is the aversion for a sensible evil, evil, either present or

absent.

3. Desire - is a tendency towards a sensible good that is absent.

4. Horror - is a turning away from a sensible evil that is either absent or

foreseeable in the future.

5. Joy - is a feeling of pleasant well-being produced by the presence or

possession of the desirable good.

6. Grief - is a sorrowful experience produced by the presence of evil.

7. Hope - is the reaching out towards a future good whose attainment is

possible.

8. Despair - is the turning away from a desired good that is impossible

to attain.
 9. Bravery - is the courage to attack an evil that is possible to
overcome.

10. Anger - is a state of displeasure excited by a feeling of having been

insulted combined with a desire to avenge an injury.

11. Fear - is a state of mental anguish resulting from the thought that a
threatening evil cannot possibly overcome.

Moral Consideration of the Passions:

1. Passions may become good when ordered by the rational will to

help man in the practice of virtue, or in the attainment of that which is
morally good.

2. Passions may become bad when used by the rational will do an

evil act.

3. The passions are called antecedent when the spring in to an action

unstimulated by any act of the will.

4. The passions are called consequent when the will, directly or

indirectly, stirs them up or fosters them.

Ethical Principles Related to the Passions:

1. Antecedent passion lessens the voluntariness of an act.

2. Antecedent passion does not destroy the voluntariness of an act.

3. Consequent passion does not lessen the voluntariness of an act.

4. Consequent passion does not lessen voluntariness but rather

increase it.

C. FEAR - is disturbance of the mind caused by the thought that a

threatening evil cannot be possibly overcome. It consists in the
apprehension by the mind of an impending evil. As a type of an experience
of mental character, it is a separate modifier of human voluntariness. Thus,
a man may deliberately and calmly steal property because he is afraid of
the Shame of mendicancy.
 Kinds of Fear:

1. Fear that causes the doer to act - as when the person being
threatened at gun point, surrenders his wallet to a hold-upper.

2. Fear that accompanies the performance of the act - as when a person

climbs a coconut tree for the first at the request of
his beloved.

3. Slight Fear - as if the amount or proximity of the impending evil slight

or remote.

4. Grave Fear - as if the amount or proximity of the impending evil is

grave or serious.

Ethical Principles Related to Fear:

1. Acts that are caused by fear are simply and absolutely voluntary.

2. Fear as a “disturbance of the mind” decrease the voluntariness but

does not destroy it.

3. Fear considered as an ordinary passion may increase or diminish

the voluntariness of the human act according to rules established in
connection with the antecedent and consequent passions.

4. Acts accompanied by fear are simply voluntary with although they

may not be pleasant to the individual.

D. VIOLENCE - is the application of external physical force against a

person by another by the purpose against a person by for the purpose of
compelling the former to do something against his will. It is the actual
application of “Physical force” to extort something from a person.

Ethical Principle Related to Violence:

1. Violence does not destroy freedom and the intrinsic power of

choice and therefore, voluntariness remains intact.
 2. Physical Acts resulting from violence are involuntary by
themselves.

3. Active resistance should be always be offered to an unjust

aggressor.

E. HABITS - is a constant and easy way of doing things acquired by the

repetition of the same act. Habits are formed in man like a second nature.

Kinds of Habits:

1. Good Habits - which are acquired through the repetition of good

acts. They are Virtues.

2. Bad Habits - which are acquired through the repetition of bad acts.
They are called vices.

Ethical Principle Related to Habits:

1. Habits do not destroy voluntariness; actions performed by the

“force of Habit” are imputable to man.

2. If a habit has been contracted absolutely involuntarily and

unintentionally, then the existence of the habit and the acts proceed
unintentionally from the habit will lack voluntariness and
responsibility as long as the person concerned remains ignorant of
existence of such a habit.

3. If an evil habit has been contracted voluntarily but a positive and

constant effort is being made to removed it, the acts inadvertently
proceeding from the habit are considered involuntarily and, not
imputable to man because of the lack of advertence and for his good
intention and efforts to break the habit.

THE PROBLEM OF DOUBLE EFFECTS RESULTING FROM AN ACT

There are some acts from which two or more effects may result. This
case presents a great moral problem because are often conflicting, one
good and the other bad. These effects may not be directly intended by the
doer who performs them, but they are foreseen and therefore, indirectly
willed as a consequence of his action. There are two cases of this:
1. When from a good or indifferent action, one evil effect directly and
necessarily results.

2. When from a good or indifferent action, two effects results, one good
and one evil. This is the case of the “double effects.”

Ethical Principles:

1. A person is held morally responsible for any evil effect which

result from the action itself, directly and necessarily as a natural
consequence, though the evil effect is not directly willed.

2. A human act from which two effects may result, one good and one
bad, is morally permissible under four conditions. If any one of this
conditions is violated, the action is not justifiable and therefore, it
should not be done.

a. The action must be morally good in itself or at least morally

indifferent

b. The good effect of the action must come before the evil effect
or at least, be simultaneous with it.

c. The motive or intention prompting the action must be directed

towards the attainment of the good effect; the evil effect is only
permitted as an accidental result.

d. The good effect be more important or at least equally important

as the evil effect.
 THE STANDARDS OF HUMAN ACTS
(NORMS OF MORALITY)

A. THE OBJECTIVE STANDARDS

OF MORALITY

These are determinants of the human act in connection with its moral
character or its intrinsic goodness or badness. These are external factors and do
not depend on the doer of the action.

1. THE OBJECT OF THE ACT

This is the basic factor of morality for it is the substance of the human
action. According to St. Thomas, the primary and specific goodness or
badness of an action is derived from the OBJECT to which it naturally and
directly tends as it is expressed by its name.

2. THE LAW

St. Thomas Aquinas defined law as an ordinance of right reason given by

one who has charge over a community for the common good and duly
promulgated. (Law must be reasonable and this means that it must be just,
honest, possible of fulfillment, useful, relatively permanent and promulgated.

A law is promulgated for the common good. This is the purpose of law.
In this point a law is distinguished from a precept:

A precept is an ordinance issued by public or private authority for the

particular or private good of one or several persons.

A law also differs from a precept in the fact that a law is territorial and
applies to subjects only while they are in certain place; while a precept is
personal and binds its subjects wherever they may be.

Again, a law is always enacted by public authority, while a precept may be

issued by either public or private authority.

Finally, a law endures in force until it is repealed by the authority that

enacted it, even though the actual persons who framed it be dead or removed
from office; but a precept ceases to bind with the preceptor’s death or removal
from office.

Classification of Laws

a. According to the Immediate Author

i. Divine Laws - which come directly from God.

ii. Human Laws - which are the enactments of Church or State

Ecclesiastical Laws - human laws enacted by the Church.

Civil Laws - human laws enacted by the State.

b. According to their Duration

 i. Eternal Law - is God’s plan and providence for the universe.

ii. Temporal Law - all human laws are temporal laws.

c. According to the manner of their Promulgation

i. Natural Law - eternal law as apprehended by human reason.

ii. Positive Law - law enacted by positive e. According to the effect of

their violation

i. Moral - violation of which is fault or sin.

ii. Penal - violation of which renders the violator liable to penalty, but
does not infect him with sin.

iii. Mixed - violation of which involves both fault and penalty.

3. THE CIRCUMSTANCES

These are conditions that affect an act and may affect it morally although
they do not belong to the essence of the act as such.

In other words, circumstances are conditions without which the act could
exist, but which happen to affect or qualify it in its concrete performance.

Moralists identify seven circumstances of an act:

a. Quis - Who? Circumstance of Person. This refers to either the person who
performs the act or to the person upon whom the act was done.

b. Quid - What - Circumstance of Quantity or Quality of the Object, i.e.,

the act. What is the extent of the act? Was the injury inflicted serious or
slight?

c. Ubi - Where? Circumstance of Place. act of a legislator.

d. According as they prescribe an act or forbid it

i. Affirmative Law - binds always, but not at every moment.

ii. Negative or Prohibitory Law - binds always and at every moment.

Where was the action done?

d. Quibus Auxiliis - With what Ally? Circumstance of Means or Instrument.

Ally does not mean a companion but it refers to the instrument used in the
performance of the act.

e. Cur - In What Condition? How? Circumstance of Manner. Was the doer in

good or bad faith? Was the doer’s disposition good or bad, intensely
malicious or only slightly so?

f. Quomodo - When? Circumstance of Time. This points to the time when

the act was performed.
 g. Quando - Why? Circumstance of Purpose. What was the doer’s purpose
in doing the act? What does he want to achieve? Is his intention good or
bad?

Ethical Principles Related to Circumstances

1. An indifferent act becomes good or evil by reason of its circumstances

2. A good act may become evil by reason of circumstances.

3. An evil act can never be made good by circumstances.

4. An act may become better or worse, or may take on a new goodness
or evil by reason of circumstances.
5. A gravely evil circumstance entirely vitiates a good act.

6. A slightly evil circumstance does not entirely vitiate a good act.

B. THE SUBJECTIVE STANDARDS

OF MORALITY

These are norms of morality whose direct source is the human doer.

1. CONSCIENCE

It is the practical judgment of reason upon an individual act as good and

therefore, to be done; or an evil, and therefore, to be avoided. Sometimes,
conscience is defined as the inner voice in man telling him to do what is good
and to avoid what is evil. Still, others define it as the application of one’s
knowledge to what is being done here and now. Conscience is the inner voice
of God to man.

Kinds of Conscience

a. True Conscience - when reason judges as good what is really good; and
as evil what is really evil.

b. Erroneous Conscience - when reason judges what is good as evil; and

what is evil as good.

c. Sure Conscience - when the judgment made is firm and assured without
any fear of committing error.

d. Doubtful Conscience - when the doer is aware of the possibility of

committing error.

e. Scrupulous Conscience - when the doer is constantly beset by fear of

doing what is wrong even when he thinks that the act is good.

f. Lax Conscience - when the doer becomes so permissive and easily

excuses his own wrong doings or blames it upon others.

g. Dead Conscience - when the reason of the doer becomes so numbed and
can no longer 4. In question of the lawfulness or unlawfulness of an act to
be performed or omitted (direct certainty being unachievable and the reflex
 principle being employed), one may follow any solidly probable reason
(opinion) even to the neglect of a more probable one.

5. One may not follow a probable opinion (even a most probable one) when
there is a question of a definite end to be achieved and that sure means to
its achievement exist.

Education of Conscience

Due to the moral and eternal consequences of our human acts, it becomes
clear for us to understand the necessity and importance of educating our
conscience. Developing a true or sure conscience is possible through:

1. Study - one should study and have a sufficiently clear understanding of

the truths of faith and the moral principles.

2. Consultation - in case of moral doubts or problems, it is best to seek help

from prudent and knowledgeable persons through consultation.

3. Learn the Value of Small Things - negligence can become disastrous.

4. Lead a Good Moral Life - when one does not practice what he believes,
time will come when distinguish what is right from what is wrong.

Ethical Principles Related to Conscience

1. A sure conscience is always to be obeyed, even when it is invincibly

erroneous.

2. It is never lawful to act when conscience is doubtful; moral certainty must

be first acquired.

3. Only when direct means are not available, or fail to lead to certainty, may
one employ the reflex principle - that a doubtful law does not bind.
he will believe in what he practices.

2. PURPOSE OF THE DOER

By the purpose of the doer or the end of the agent, we mean that which the
agent (doer, performer of an act) intends or wishes to achieve by his act. It is
the end he has in view, his purpose, his motive in performing the act.

A human act which is good in itself (i.e., as object) may still be evil by
reason of the end (of the agent) for which it is performed. But a human act
which is evil in itself cannot be made good by reason of the end for which it is
performed. In other words, the influence of the end of the agent can be strong
enough to swerve an act out of line with reason, but it cannot be strong
enough to bring a bad act into line with reason.

Now the question arises: how far does the influence of the end of the
agent extend? Is a good act ruined entirely by a bad end? Is a bad act made
worse by a bad end? What if there are several ends, or may, some good, some
evil. The answer to these questions may be easily discerned in the ethical
principles related to the purpose of the doer.
Ethical Principles related to the Purpose of the Doer

1. A good act done for a good purpose takes on an added or a new

goodness from the good purpose and from every good purpose that
influence the action.

2. A bad act done for an evil purpose takes on an added or new malice from
the bad purpose and from every evil purpose that influence the action.

3. An evil act can never become good by reason of a good end.

4. A good action done for an evil purpose is rendered wholly evil if the evil
purpose is the complete motive for the performance of the action; or if the
purpose, while only a partial motive of the action, is gravely evil. A good
action done for a slightly evil purpose and not the whole motive of the act, is
only vitiated partially.

5. An indifferent action becomes good if it is done for a good purpose; it

becomes evil if done for an evil purpose.
 HUMAN ACTS

I. CONCEPT AND NATURE OF HUMAN ACTS

Man in no doubt is creative because he possesses tremendous bodily

and spiritual powers. Every minute of his life, he acts, transforming
himself and the world around him. Action constitutes a person, an
individual in control of himself and accountable to himself. What a person
is and what becomes of him depend largely on the type of actions he
performs during his lifetime.

A. CONCEPT OF HUMAN ACTS

Human acts (actus humani) are actions that proceed from insight into
the nature and purpose of one’s doing and from consent of free will; or
shorter, they are acts which proceed from insight and free will. The human
acts are those actions which man performs knowingly, freely, and
voluntarily. These actions are the result of conscious knowledge and are
subject to the control of the will.

Human acts are to be distinguished from acts of man (actus hominis),

which are performed without intervention of intellect and free will. They
comprise all spontaneous biological and sensual processes, like nutrition,
breathing, sensual impressions; all acts performed by those who have not
the use of reason, like people asleep, lunatics, drunken people; all
spontaneous reactions which precede the activity of intellect and will, like
first reactions of anger or sympathy. Likewise distinguished from human
acts are forced acts which are carried out against a man’s personal
decision and will.

Acts of man are man’s animal acts of sensation as well as acts that man
performs indeliberately or without advertence and the exercise of free
choice.

Human act is an act which proceeds from deliberate free will of man.
Human acts are only those acts that are proper to man as man. “A man is
what his human acts make him.”
B. CONSTITUENT PRINCIPLES OF HUMAN ACTS

Constituent principles of the human acts are those inner causes which
generate the act. As the definition of the human act makes plain, there are
two principles which constitute this act: an intellectual and a volitive
constituent.

1. THE INTELLECTUAL CONSTITUENT

The will can decide for something and seek it only if it is first known.
Hence the human act is voluntary only if its different elements are
sufficiently known. This requires as essential conditions for a human
act, knowledge of the aspired object, attention to the action with which
the object is to be pursued, and judgements on the value of the act.
The reason is that man cannot will without knowing what object he is
concerned with, without being master and therefore conscious of the
act he is to perform in order to realize the aim, and without evaluating
the action in its concrete nature as a desirable good or undesirable evil
which appraisal also includes the judgement on the moral value of the
act.

Furthermore, an action is human, and therefore good or bad, only

under those of its aspects which are known. If a man robs and strikes a
person not knowing him to be a priest, he is guilty of criminal injury but
not a personal sacrilege. If somebody strikes and wounds a relative
whom in the dark he erroneously thinks to be a burglar, he is not guilty
of sinful injury at all, but he is the victim of an error which excuses from
guilt.

2. THE VOLITIVE CONSTITUENT

Every voluntary act of man includes a necessary element, the quest

for good (the formal element of every desire), and a free element, the
choice of the concrete object in which the good is sought (the material
element of desire). It is because of this second aspect that we say that
the voluntary act, and therefore the human act, is free.

If a man for some reason is not free to choose what he would like
according to his insight and will, but has to act against his will, his
action is not free and consequently not a human act. Suppose a
psychologically afflicted person feels compelled to wash his hands
again and again. He is clearly conscious of the object he is concerned
with an of the action with which the object is pursued; and he is also
 aware that this act is of no real value and ought therefore not to be
performed. In executing the act nevertheless, he does so under the
pressures of his psychic compulsion, i.e., without consent of his free
will. Since such an act is not voluntary, it is not a human act.

Hence as a second essential condition for a human act consent of

the free will is required, which implies freedom from any external or
internal compulsion.

C. DIVISIONS OF THE VOLUNTARY ACT AND EFFECT

Human act and voluntary effect (both covered by one Latin term
“voluntarium” , since both are the outcome of insight and consent of will)
are distinguished in many ways. Some of the more important divisions
shall be given in the following:

1. THE PERFECTLY AND IMPERFECTLY VOLUNTARY ACT

Perfectly voluntary act is an act which is performed with full

attention and full consent of the will. Imperfectly voluntary is an act if
attention or consent of the will or both together are imperfect. Though
imperfect attention and imperfect consent usually go hand in hand, full
attention can nevertheless at times exist together with imperfect
consent. Thus a person who acts under the influence of fear may act
with full attention but with imperfect consent.

2. THE ACTUALLY AND VIRTUALLY `VOLUNTARY ACT

Actually voluntary is an act that proceeds from the present

deliberation of the will; virtually voluntary is the act if it is placed by
virtue of a previous deliberation that still persists in its effect. An
actually voluntary act is had, e.g., when somebody is deciding to collect
food and clothing for the victims of an earthquake. The act is virtually
voluntary if the organizer of the relief action is busy with entering the
arriving goods and with packing them, not thinking of the aid he wants
to provide for the victims; but all his activity is lastly inspired by his will
to aid, and asked why he engages in all that activity, he would
immediately have the reflex knowledge again that he is working for the
victims of the earthquake.
3. THE DIRECTLY AND INDIRECTLY VOLUNTARY EFFECT

The effect is directly voluntary if it is intended in itself as an end,

e.g., murder for the sake of revenge, or if it is intended as means for
another end, e.g. murder for the sake of revenge, or if it is intended as
means for another end, e.g., murder for reasons of robbery and profit.
The effect is indirectly voluntary if it is not intended but merely
permitted as the inevitable result of an object directly willed. Thus the
death of a fetus caused by the removal of a uterus affected by cancer is
not intended as a means nor as an end but only permitted as an
indirectly voluntary effect. In the latter case, colloquial language
commonly rather speaks of side effect. For example, a medicine
against cancer may have the undesired though foreseen, side-effect of
nausea.

4. THE POSITIVELY AND NEGATIVELY VOLUNTARY EFFECT

The will-effects something positively by exercising active influence

on the causation of an object, as for instance, injuring a neighbor by
setting his house on fire (which, being an offense against justice
obliges to restitution). The will effects something negatively by
voluntary omission of an act which could have averted an evil from
another person or helped him to secure a good. Thus it is negatively
voluntary not to extinguish a fire already started in a neighbor’s house;
or not to tip off robbers of the presence of the police. Evidently in the
first case the omission is sinful (but being an offense against charity
only, it does not oblige to restitution), in the second not.
Branches of Philosophy

A. Philosophy of Thought
It is that part of philosophy that deals with answering
the problems related to knowledge and reasoning. This includes
Epistemology and Logic

1. Epistemology
Comes from two Greek words: episteme which means
knowledge and logos which means study. Epistemology is a
philosophical theory that deals with the origin of human
knowledge; hence, it is also known as the Theory of Knowledge.
Inasmuch as it also tries to seek for the criterion of truth, it also
became known as Criteriology. Its main concern is the nature of
knowledge, its possibility, scope, and general basis.
2. Logic
This is the branch of philosophy that deals with the
problem of reasoning. It is basically the science and art of
distinguishing correct from the incorrect. It is the study of the
methods and principles used in determining the correct from
the incorrect reasoning. In distinguishing the correct from the
incorrect thinking, it is necessary that reason must be applied.
However, since every science makes use of reasoning. Logic, in
this regard, underlies all sciences. Logic is considered as the
scietia scientiarum, the science of sciences.
B. Philosophy of Reality
This is that part of philosophy that deals with the reality
of the world., of the existence of God, the metaphysical beings,
and the immortality of the human soul. This includes
Metaphysics, Theodicy, Cosmology, Philosophy of Psychology,
Social Philosophy, and Political Philosophy

1. Metaphysics
This branch of philosophy is considered as the most
abstract and, in some view, the most ‘highfalutin’ part of
philosophy. Metaphysics is the branch of philosophy that deals
with the origin of things. It is basically the study of being in it
general aspects. It is concerned with the ultimate reality and
deals about being-ness beyond the physical entity; hence the
word meta which means beyond. This is the branch of
philosophy that deals with the study of the nature of beings as it
tries to answer the questions like “what is being?” and “what
are the fundamental properties of being?”
2. Theodicy
This is also known as Natural Theology or the
Philosophy of Religion. This is the branch of philosophy that
deals with the problem of God’s existence. Basically, it tries to
answer the question: “Is there a God?” Just like Theology,
Theodicy is also a study of the nature of God and His existence.
However, Theodicy is different from Theology since the former
deals with the study of God under the light of natural reason,
while the latter deals with the study of God under the light of
faith. Theodicy upholds the principle fides quaeren intellectum,
that is, faith follows reason.
3. Cosmology
The term cosmology comes from the two Greek words kosmos
which means universe and logos which means study. Etymologically,
Cosmology is the study of the universe from a philosophical viewpoint.
Basically, it is the study of the corporeal beings. It deals with the reality
of the origin and the end of the universe.

4. Philosophy of Psychology
Psychology comes from the two Greek words psuche/psyche
meaning soul, and logos meaning study. Psychology is etymologically,
the study of the soul. Philosophers consider the soul as the principle of
life and the reason why people behave. It is for this reason that
psychology has been defined eventually as the study of human
behavior. Philosophy of Psychology, which is also known as the
Rational Psychology, is the study that deals with man not only as a
sensing and thinking subject, but also as a being composed of body and
soul. It treats the whole being of man as man. In this case,
philosophical psychology deals with the questions like: “is there a soul?
And “is the soul really immortal?”
5. Social Philosophy
This branch of philosophy deals with the philosophical
study of a society and its institutions. It is concerned with
determining the feature of the ideal or best society as it deals
with the study of relationships of the human person with others,
with environment, and with society.

6. Political Philosophy
If discussed from a normative point of view, political
philosophy is equivalent to social philosophy since both deals
with the discussion on the society as a whole. The word politics
comes from the Greek word polis which means city or
community. Hence political philosophy deals with society.
However, political philosophy focuses on one social institution,
the state, and seeks to determine its justification and proper
organization. As it studies the facts about social organization,
political philosophy also evaluates the social organization,
especially government, from an ethical viewpoint.
C. Philosophy of Morality
Philosophy of Morality is that part of philosophy that
deals with man’s question regarding the problems of morals
and good deeds. It makes the human person understand the
good as good and the evil as evil. This part includes Ethics,
Aesthetics and the Philosophy of Person.

1. Ethics
The word ethics comes from the Greek word ethos
which means customs, usage, or character. It is the
philosophical study of moral judgments. It tries to study the
human acts and searches for the means on how to obtain
wisdom regarding how life should be lived. It is also known as
moral philosophy as it tries to seek for means on how to
determine whether an action is good or evil. Consequently, it
tries to explain that a good act can lead to a meaningful
existence
2. Aesthetics
The term aesthetics comes from the Greek word aesthesis
which means harmony. This is the branch of philosophy that
provides meaning on arts and beauty; hence, it is also known as
the philosophy of art. It deals with the questions about the
meaning of beauty and tries to determine whether the beauty is
in the subject or in the object. Aesthetics is considered as part of
the philosophy of morals inasmuch as man is considered moral if
he lives in harmony with the community and with the values and
character of the society.

3. Philosophy of Person
It deals with the philosophical inquiry into the human
being as a person and as an existing being in the world. It deals
with the study about the dignity of man, truth, freedom, justice,
love, death and his relationship with other human beings and
with God.
The Philosophies of Discipline
Although philosophy may have been divided into three
main divisions, eventually, it covers many disciplines and areas
of intellectual inquiry. Philosophy deals with nearly every
intellectual endeavor and said intellectual endeavor may still
be counted as philosophy. For this reason, philosophy can also
be divided into the following branches called the Philosophies
of Discipline.

1. Philosophy of Science
This is the branch of philosophy that deals with the
justification and objectivity of scientific knowledge. It is
concerned with the foundations, the methods, and processes,
as well as the importance of science as a discipline. It deals
with the reliability of scientific theories. This can be subdivided
into two broad areas: the espistemology of science, which uses
the justification and objectivity of scientific knowledge, and the
metaphysics of science, which discusses the philosophically
puzzling aspects of reality uncovered by science.
2. Philosophy of Mathematics
According to Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, if
mathematics is regarded as a science, then the philosophy of
mathematics can be regarded as a branch of philosophy of
science, next to disciplines such as philosophy of physics, and
the philosophy of biology. But because the methods of
investigation of mathematics are different from the methods of
investigation of natural sciences, then the philosophy of
mathematics cannot really be part of the philosophy of science.
The aim of the philosophy of mathematics is to provide an
account of the nature and methodology of mathematics and the
place of mathematics in the overall intellectual life.

3. Philosophy of Education
This is the branch of philosophy that provides a
philosophical understanding of the issues in education. It deals
with the different methods of education and its effects on the
learning of the human person.
4. Philosophy of Law
This branch of Philosophy deals with the why’s of law. If
ethics is an inquiry about standards of right judgement in
deliberation towards choice and action, philosophy of law
investigates the relation of those standards to the directives laid
down by usage or authoritative decision. It also aims to guide
people’s actions in the political community and thereby, protect
basic interests or rights, distribute burdens and advantages fairly,
and restore the position of persons wronged.

5. Philosophy of Biology
This is the branch of philosophy that provides
explanations for some biological traits, not only of the human
person but of other organisms in question. This provides an
understanding of biological traits by providing explanations on
certain biological questions like why is it that polar bears are
white while grizzly bears are brown. Philosophy of biology
provides functional or teleological explanations on certain issues
in biology.
The Philosophies of Subjects
Philosophy can also be subdivided into different subjects.
This division is what we call the Philosophies of Subject, which
can be subdivided into the following: Philosophy of Mind,
Philosophy of Culture, Philosophy of History, Philosophy of Sport,
Philosophy of Love, and Philosophy of Women.

1. Philosophy of Mind
It has been said that philosophizing about the mind is as
old as philosophy itself. However, philosophy of mind is relatively
recent. This branch of philosophy is concerned with the issues
like characterizing the mental, the mind-body problem (the
account for the status of mind in the world that is essentially
physical), the mental causation, intentionality, consciousness,
and the nature of personhood. Basically, it deals with the
problem of giving an account of how the mind, or mental
processes are related to the bodily system.
2. Philosophy of History
This branch of philosophy that attempts to answer
substantive questions dealing with such matters as the
significance or possible purpose of the historical processes and
the factors that are fundamentally responsible for historical
development and change.

3.Philosophy of Sport
This philosophy attempts to answer the questions like:
“how close is the aesthetic interest we take in the sport to our
interest in the arts?” This branch of philosophy related sports
with aesthetics while it also tries to explain the philosophy behind
winning in relation to its aesthetic quality.
4. Philosophy of Culture
This is the philosophical study of all the aspects of human
life, that is, the historical, anthropological, and the sociological
dimensions of social life. It aims to interpret and transmit to
future generations the system of values in terms of which
participants, in a form of life, find meaning and purpose.

5. Philosophy of Love
This is the branch of philosophy that deals with affection
or attachment. The issue of love, especially sexual, had been an
issue since the time of Plato, who viewed love as a desire for
beauty. In which case, philosophy of love may also be connected
with aesthetics. Nevertheless, the main preoccupation of the
philosophy of love is on the meaning and value of love in the
human person.
The Contemporary Philosophical Traditions
In dealing with the contemporary philosophical traditions,
philosophy can be divided into three divisions: Analytic Philosophy,
Existentialism, and Phenomenology.

1. Analytic Philosophy
This is the belief that the proper method of philosophy is
analysis. Therefore, analytic philosophers focus on the problems
that can be resolved through analysis. Analytic philosophy is an
influential non-literary approach to philosophy that stresses logic,
testability, precision, and clarity. Analytic philosophers, like John
Locke, David Hume, Bertrand Russell, and Ludwig Wittgenstein,
contented that close logical and linguistics analyses are thought to
be the only proper methods for sorting out philosophical
confusions; hence, they are commonly contrasted with the
continental philosophy.
2. Existentialism
The focus of existentialism, or continental philosophy, lies
on the problem that arises from our living in a world that in many
ways is unreasonable and absurd. It emphasizes fundamental
questions of meaning and choice as they affect existing individuals.
Themes like choice, freedom, identity, alienation, inauthenticity,
despair, and awareness of our own mortality are very much
prominent in the discussion of existentialism.

3. Phenomenology
This is the philosophical tradition that defaces assumptions
and presuppositions and upholds phenomena as they are
apprehended. This is the method of philosophical analysis that
was first developed by Edmund Husserl, who claimed that we have
to focus on concrete “experienced facts” rather than abstractions
in order to reveal the “essence” of human consciousness.
ETHICS DEFINED

Ethics is more clearly defined as “ a practical and normative science, based on reason,
which studies human acts, and provides norms for their goodness and badness.

As a science, Ethics is a systematic study of the grounds and norms of morality.

As a practical science, Ethics deals with systematized body of knowledge that is applicable
to human action. For this reason, the primary consideration of Ethics is the application of
human knowledge and its practicality to human experience. Therefore, Ethics is to be
considered a necessary part of life, that is a part of man’s daily existence.

As a normative science, Ethics sets a basis or a norm for the direction and regulation of
human actions, it aids man in distinguishing whether one’s action can be considered good
or bad.

As a science, Ethics must be based on reason, thus all ethical theories and all moral
decisions must have its basis from the power of reason. As based on reason, Ethics is
different from religion or theology, it is not tied up with religion and theology.

Ethics studies human acts.

Ethics provides norms for the goodness and badness of a certain act.
ETHICS
What is Philosophy?
Two Greeks words
‘philo’ - love
‘sophia’ – wisdom
philosophia – love of wisdom, coined by
Pythagoras (one of the sages of ancient
Greece, born about the year 584 B.C.)

Philosopher - lover of
wisdom
Philosophy
is the search for wisdom
is search for meaning.

Wisdom means learning the

principle of things, the first
cause of all things, and the
meaning and purpose of
understanding such things.
Wisdom deals with an
understanding of the meaning
of one’s existence and the
importance of the things
around the human person.
Who is the wise person?

* a wise person is one who

is aware of what he knows
and what he does not know
* a wise person holds beliefs
that are not only true but
which can also justify.

* a wise person knows a lot

about things that are valuable
in life.
* a wise person can put his
knowledge to practical use.

* a wise person does not only

know what is true, but also
knows what is good or what
ought to be done in a given
situation and acts
accordingly.
Thus, wisdom consists in:

a) knowing what one knows

and does not know

b) having justified true

beliefs
 c) knowing things that are
valuable in life

d) having the ability to put

knowledge into practice

e) knowing what should be

done and acting accordingly.
 Question:

What is the advantage of one

who knows that he/she does
not know over another who
does not know that he/she
does not know?
Philosophy is the science of
beings (things) in their
ultimate reason, causes, and
principles acquired by the aid
of human reason alone.
 Philosophy is a search for
meaning. Philosophy is
engaged in the search of the
meaning of life.
Philosophy is an important
part of the human person’s
life whether he knows it or
not because a human
person is, by nature, a
rational being, as such his
nature is to search for the
source of his own fulfillment
and happiness.
Importance of Philosophy
Why should we philosophize
or study philosophy?
What good will philosophizing
do considering that we are in
a world where life is hard and
largely dictated by scientific
and technological advances?
What is the point of doing
philosophy?
*Philosophy supplements
scientific explanations to
come up with holistic
explanations.
*Contributes to the
development of some
disciplines
*Provides ethical guidelines
for the use of modern
technology
*Contributes to social
transformation
* Expands the boundaries of
knowledge
Philosophy concerns itself with the
acquisition of truth. Because it focuses on
truth, Philosophy, therefore, involves
critical thinking. Philosophy deals
basically with the systematic search for
the origin and nature of the world, the
explanation of one’s knowledge and
belief, and the explanation regarding the
manner of life.
 GECC 123 – ETHICS

Course Description

Ethics is a course designed to equip the student with the basic and fundamental
moral principles and values. This is a subject meant to re-study, re-introduce and
reformulate, in simpler ways, the different theories and concepts in ethics. The concepts
learned in this subject will be imbibed and applied to the individual and the society for its
development and progress.

Course Outcomes

At the end of the term, the students are expected to:

To instill the fundamentals of ethics and morality.

To understand the different theories on moral actions.
To explain the foundations of morality and the various means to keep it.
To identify the different goodness a person has and how it affects the society in
general.
To reorganize the value system of individuals for a better community.
To impart the sense of scientific literacy and develop interest to
knowledge of ethics and continue learning throughout their lives.
To instill the “God-fearing person” into every individual for a better society.

Course Learning Outcomes

After completing this course, the students will be able to:

Discuss an overview of Ethics and some important facts about its scope and
limitations
Discuss/ Tackle Ethics as a branch of philosophy.
Provide valuable information about Ethics and understand the components that
make up a norm.
Know the significance of ethical responsibility in the society
Make an assessment on the ethical life of students and to help them become
more moral agents.
Acquaints students to the importance morality to the development of one’s self.
Educate students on the implication of inequality and stratification
Enumerate the ethical system and know their roles in the society in molding the
youth
Inculcate enough knowledge in students about contemporary th eories in ethics
Tackles important things and topics about morality
Comprehend the effects of human acts and how it affects the individual.
To teach to perform responsible actions