LESSON

6&7
THE INDIRECT VOLUNTARY
The act from which several effects may result is known in Ethics as the
indirect act or voluntary in cause.

This effects may not be directly intended by the person who performs the
action, but they are foreseen and therefore, indirectly willed as a consequence
of his action.

 The two cases of indirect voluntary acts are:

(1) When from a good or indifferent action, one evil effect directly and
DANNYLYN TUMAGNA
necessarily results. JESIKA GRACE VILLEGAS ANNA FE VILLARANTE

(2) When from a good or indifferent action, two effects result, one good and
one evil. This is known as the case of the double effect.
 1. The First indirect voluntary

Principle : A person is held morally responsible for any evil effect which flows
from the action itself directly and necessarily as a natural consequence, though
the evil effect is not directly willed or intended.

Example:
On November 1, 1955, John Gilbert Graham put a time bomb in the luggage of his mother who took it
aboard an American airliner. The bomb exploded while the airplane was in flight, killing the mother of Mr.
Graham and other forty passengers. Although the motive of that criminal act was never revealed by the
parricide, he aroused suspicion when he named himself beneficiary to an insurance policy he had
previously taken out on his mother’s life. Mr. Graham might have been directly interested only in the
insurance money; but indirectly as a foreseen consequence, he willed the death of all passengers. He
was held responsible for one of the greatest crimes in the history of the United States and was
consequently condemned to death in the gas chamber of the State of Colorado.
 2. The second indirect voluntary
Principle: A human act from which two effects may result, one good and one evil, is
morally permissible under four conditions. If any of the conditions is violated, the
action is not justifiable and 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. To do
evil in order that good may come of it is never permitted. Evil cannot be used as a means or factor in
the accomplishment of the good.

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 incidental result.

d) The good effect must be more important or at least equally important as the evil effect.
 Practical Cases
Case 1:
Peter sees Tony being attacked by a drunken man and realizes that, unless assisted, Tony will be
badly beaten up. He decides, however, not to stop them because he (Peter) enjoys seeing the fight.
Does he sin against charity?

Case 2:
Peter does not like to miss the only Sunday Mass celebrated in his town, but he feels tired because of
a late party the night before and upon hearing the church bells ringing, remains in bed. As a result, he
fails to fulfill his obligations. Is he responsible for this act of omission?

Case 3:
Both mother and child are in real danger of death during a delivery. In order to save the life of the
mother, the doctor crushes the head of the child directly killing him. May he do so?
THE SOURCES OF MORALITY
 The sources of Morality
The agreement and disagreement of the human sets to the norms of morality
must be known concretely, i,e. in particular cases.

For this reason, we must now analyze the human act, not from the point of view of the
internal or psychological process but attending to the objectiveness of the act itself and
the circumstances surrounding it including the motive of the moral agent.

The sources or principles of morality which are to be discussed are the determinants of
the human acts in connection with their moral character. Human reason evaluates the
goodness and wrongness of a human act by taking into consideration the object , the
end, and the circumstances of the act.
 1. The Object
The basic factor of morality, the substance of the moral act.

The teachings of St. Thomas on the essence of morality center on the object as proved by this
summary:

1.) A good or moral action is a perfect action because it has the fullness of being.

2.) An action has the fullness of being when it is in accordance with its species i.e. nature or essence.

3.) The nature or essence of an action is given by the object about which the action is. The fundamental
goodness or badness of an action depends on the object.

4.) An object is good when it is in conformity with its nature or the purpose for which it was made.
Otherwise an object is bad or evil.
 1. The Object
5.) In the moral order, an object is good when it is in conformity with reason, when it is suitable to
reason. Otherwise it is evil. Consequently, an action is good or moral when it is in conformity with reason
which is the proximate norm of morality. Any action not in conformity with reason is a bad action.

• Essentially, good acts would be: The love of God, the help of our neighbors, the protection of the
destituts. Evil acts murder, theft, blasphemy.

• Indifferent acts: talking, walling, standing.

• The morality concerning the object is named material or substantial morality to distinguish it from
the subjective or formal morality which depends on the knowledge and freedom of the agent.

• It may happen that a certain action contains a material morality while the formal morality is absent.
 2. The Motive
The purpose or intention is that for the sake of which something is done. It is the reason behind
our acting.

The end or intention can modify human action in four ways:

a.) An indifferent act may become morally good or evil.

b.)An objectively good act may become morally evil.

c.)An objectively good act may receive more goodness.

d )An objectively evil act can never become good in spite of the good motive.
 3. The Circumstances
Circumstances are conditions modifying human actions, either by increasing or by
diminishing the responsibility attending them.

But more frequently circumstances play an important role in affecting the morality
of our actions because man’s acts are performed at definite time and place, in a
particular manner, for a certain reason, etc., all of which, in one way or another, increase
or diminish the responsibility of the action.
 THE CIRCUMSTANCES AFFECTING THE MORALITY OF OUR ACTIONS ARE SEVEN:

A. WHO- is the subject or the person who does or receives the action. Persons
are different in many ways : superiors, rulers and subjects, priest and laymen, parents and children, rich and
poor, married and single, educated and illiterate, etc. There are also physical persons or individuals, and
moral persons such as corporations, companies, institutions, business firms, etc.

B. WHERE - is the setting or place of an action. A credit committed in a church is more serious than a
crime perpetrated in a secluded spot because of a flagrant disregard of religion. An immoral act committed
in a public place involves scandal etc.

C. WHAT- is the object intended as explained in number one of this lesson.

D. BY WHAT MEANS- Although man's intention may be normally good, if the means of attaining
the end are illicit or unlawful, his acts are immoral. "The end does not justify the means. "
E. WHY- Is the intention or the motive that moves the agent to an
action.

F. HOW -this circumstances involves different conditions or

G. WHEN- Is the time of the action performed.

Example: To kill one’s parents is not only a crime but parricide. To steal a working animal from a poor
farmer is a worse act than to steal it from rich man.

Second Principle: Circumstances may change a good or indifferent act into a punishable one.

Example: To sleep is an indifferent act. But a sentry sleeping at his post during wartime will be sentenced
by a military court to capital punishment.

To summarize: A human act, in order to be morally good, must be perfect according to the three elements:
object, and circumstances. Any deficiency will make a human act morally evil. “ Bonum ex integra causa;
malum ex quocumque defectu” – The good results from whole perfection; the evil from any defect.
 5. The Morality of the Indifferent Acts
Several times we have classified human acts under the point of view of morality as good, evil,
and indifferent acts.

St. Thomas made a classical distinction. He said that acts considered in the abstract, as they
are classified in the mind, can be morally indifferent; but considering them concretely,
accompanied by circumstances and performed by a definite individual with a definite
intention, they cannot be indifferent. They are either good or evil.

“ Every individual act must have some circumstance that makes it good or evil, at least in
respect to the intention of the end.

We move from one place to another and perform many external and corporeal actions day in and
day out, apparently indifferent.
 6. The Morality of the External Act
The goodness or badness of our moral actions depends upon reason, the object, the
intention of the agent and circumstances.

Morality of the external acts is the acts commanded by the will and executed by the
different external senses and powers of the body properly called external or material
actions.

St.Thomas says:"If the act of the will is good, the external act will also be good; but the
latter will be bad ,if the will act is bad."
 7. The Ethics of Situation
In Situation Ethics, circumstances become the root, the origin and the only criterion of
morality.

Man alone and his circumstances are the arbiters of morality. And because all men are
different, morality is also different and relative to each individual.

The Ethics situation is false, for it is against the evidence of truth; it contradicts the
dictates of our reason and destroys the social order.
THANK YOU!