At the end of the lesson, you are expected to:

• Define moral dilemma

• Recall moral dilemmas in your personal experiences
• Identify the types and three levels of moral dilemmas
• Appraise experiences as moral dilemma or non-dilemma
• Assess whether the moral dilemma is on the micro, meso, or macro level

“SWERVE OR NOT”

You are driving a long haul truck at 80mph when up ahead you see a traffic jam
begin to form. You try and slow down but nothing happens. In a panic you slam on the
breaks but its the worst case scenario; the breaks don’t work.

Directly ahead of you there are 3 lanes and 3 cars, If you lose control of the truck
now, you wont stop in time and everyone dies. You have 3 options:
• You do nothing and you will smash into the car directly in front of you. This car
has been dangerously overloaded, you can see at least 4 children in the back seat
and someone in the passenger seat, there are at least 6 people in front of you and
4 of them are children.
• You swerve right there is a young couple.
• You swerve left there is a single elderly person.

What would likely be your decision?

The problem above is not supposed to be a problem. You would have thought that 6
lives matter over 2 or 1. The last thing you would have chosen among the options would be
number 1. Nevertheless, let’s complicate it by adding information you couldn’t possibly know
in real life and bring this back to a thought experiment.
1) Suppose the young couple were on their way to murdering someone who hadn’t
really done anything wrong. Would that change your mind? (WTCYM)
2) What if one of the couple was also pregnant in this scenario? Would that change
your mind?
DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION
 3) What if there was 1 unseen infant in a car seat with the elderly person. WTCYM?
What if there were 3?
4) What if the elderly person were one of the worlds greatest doctors? WTCYM?
5) What if the road were slick on the left and going left might result in total loss of
control and possible complete chaos? WTCYM?

Moral conflict is a fact of moral life. It is something that we can never do away with. It
is embedded in the crucial decisions that we make, particularly in moments that we are
faced with what is and what should be. As moral as we want to be, our convictions are
oftentimes challenged, and if not strong enough, are dejectedly compromised. These
challenges are products of the evolving values and moral systems of our society.

What is a Moral Dilemma?

A dilemma is a situation where a person is

forced to choose between two or more conflicting
options, neither of which is acceptable. As we can
see, the key here is that the person has choices to
make that will all have results he/she does not
want. For example, a town mayor faces a dilemma
about how to protect and preserve a virgin forest
and at the same time allow miners and loggers for
economic development in the town.

It must be noted, however, that if a person is in a difficult situation but is not forced
to choose between two or more options, then that person is not in a dilemma. The least that
we can say is that that person is just experiencing a problematic or distressful situation.
Thus, the most logical thing to do for that person is to look for alternatives or solutions to
address the problem.

When dilemmas involve human actions which have moral implications, they are
called ethical or moral dilemmas.

Moral dilemmas arise due to inconsistency in our principles. In understanding the

morality of an individual, we need to emphasize that majority of the moral persons are
those who sturdily disposed to stand fast by their reflectively chosen principles and ideals
when tempted by consideration chosen that are morally irrelevant.

We experience a moral dilemma if we are faced with two actions, each of which, it
would be correct to say in the appropriate sense of “ought”, that it ought to be done, and
both of which we cannot do.

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION

 There are several types of moral dilemmas, but the most common of them are
categorized into the following: 1) epistemic and ontological dilemmas, 2) self-imposed and
world-imposed dilemmas, 3) obligation dilemmas and prohibition dilemmas, and 4) single
agent and multi-person dilemmas.

1) Epistemic moral dilemmas - involve situations wherein two or more moral

requirements conflict with each other and that the moral agent hardly knows which
of the conflicting moral requirements takes precedence over the other. In other
words, the moral agent here does not know which option is morally right or wrong.

Example: I ought to honor my promise to my son to be home early, but on my

way home I saw a sick old man who needs to be brought to the hospital.
Where does my actual duty lie? We cannot deny that there are conflicting
duties (moral requirements) here, but we need to note that we want a fuller
knowledge of the situation: Is an important purpose being served by my
getting home early? How serious is the condition of the sick old man? Indeed, I
could hardly decide which option is morally right in this situation. However,
one option must be better than the other; only, it needs fuller knowledge of the
situation―thus the term “epistemic” moral dilemmas.

Ontological moral dilemmas - involve situations wherein two or more moral

requirements conflict with each other, yet neither of these conflicting moral
requirements overrides each other. This is not to say that the moral agent does not
know which moral requirement is stronger than the other. The point is that neither of
the moral requirements is stronger than the other; hence, the moral agent can hardly
choose between the conflicting moral requirements.

Example: A military doctor is attending to the needs of the wounded soldiers

in the middle of the war. Unfortunately, two soldiers urgently need a blood
transfusion. However, only one bag of blood is available at the moment. To
whom shall the doctor administer the blood transfusion? For sure, we could
not tell whether administering a blood transfusion to Soldier A is more moral
than administering a blood transfusion to Soldier B, and vice versa.

2) A Self-imposed Moral Dilemma is caused by the moral agent’s wrongdoings.

Example: For example, David is running for the position of the town mayor.
During the campaign period, he promised the indigenous peoples in his
community to protect their virgin forest just to gain their votes, but at the
same time, he seeks financial support from a mining corporation. Fortunately,
David won the elections, yet he is faced with the dilemma of fulfilling his
promised to the indigenous peoples and at the same time allows the mining
corporation to destroy their forest. Indeed, through his own actions, David

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION

 created a situation in which it is impossible for him to be discharged from both
obligations.

A World-imposed Moral Dilemma means that certain events in the world place the
agent in a situation of moral conflict.

Example: William Styron’s famous Sophie’s Choice: “Sophie Zawistowska has

been asked to choose which of her two children, Eva or Jan, will be sent to the
gas chamber in Auschwitz. An SS doctor, Fritz Jemand von Niemand, will
grant a dispensation to only one of Sophie’s children. If she does not choose
which one should live, Dr. von Niemand will send both to their death. Sophie
chooses her daughter Eva to go to the gas chamber. Her son, Jan, is sent to
the Children’s Camp.”

3) Obligation dilemmas are situations in which more than one feasible action is
obligatory.

Example: Sartre (1957) tells of a student whose brother had been killed in the
German offensive of 1940. The student wanted to avenge his brother and to
fight forces that he regarded as evil. But the student’s mother was living with
him, and he was her one consolation in life. The student believed that he had
conflicting obligations. Sartre describes him as being torn between two kinds
of morality: one of limited scope but certain efficacy, personal devotion to his
mother; the other of much wider scope but uncertain efficacy, attempting to
contribute to the defeat of an unjust aggressor.

Prohibition dilemmas involve cases in which all feasible actions are forbidden.

Example: See Styron’s Sophie’s Choice above.

4) Single Agent Dilemma - the agent “ought, all things considered, to do A, ought, all
things considered, to do B, and she cannot do both A and B”. In other words, the
moral agent is compelled to act on two or more equally the same moral options but
she cannot choose both.

Example: A medical doctor found out that her patient has HIV. For sure, the
medical doctor may experience tension between the legal requirement to
report the case and the desire to respect confidentiality, although the medical
code of ethics acknowledges our obligation to follow legal requirements and
to intervene to protect the vulnerable.
Multi-person Dilemma - occurs in situations that involve several persons like a
family, an organization, or a community who is expected to come up with consensual
decision on a moral issue at hand. The multi-person dilemma requires more than
choosing what is right, it also entails that the persons involved reached a general

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION

 consensus. In such a manner, the moral obligation to do what is right becomes more
complicated. On the one hand, the integrity of the decision ought to be defended on
moral grounds. On the other hand, the decision must also prevent the organization
from breaking apart

Examples: A family may be torn between choosing to terminate or prolong the

life of a family member. An organization may have to choose between
complying with the wage law by cutting its workforce or by retaining its
current workforce by paying them below the required minimum wage.

1) Individual/Micro-level. The dilemma here is when the employee’s ethical standards

are in opposition to that of his or her employer, which could lead to tensions in the
workplace.

Dilemma: You see one of your close colleagues speaking inappropriately to another
member of staff. This has been going on for a while, and you’re sure that what you are
seeing is sexual harassment. You know your colleague’s actions are wrong, but you don’t
want to ruin the friendship you’ve developed with them over the past few years. What would
you do?

2) Organizational/ Meso-level. Ethical Standards

are seen in company policies. Still, there might be a gap
between those who run the business whose ethical
standards deviate from that of the organization.

Dilemma: A new manager has been appointed to

lead your department, and you find out that he is the
boss’s nephew. You also discover that he doesn’t have
the appropriate qualifications, and that he may not have
been interviewed before he was hired. Do you question
the decision or simply accept it?

3) Systemic/Macro-level. Ethics, here, is predisposed by the larger operating

environment of the company. Political pressures, economic conditions, societal attitudes
and others, can affect the operating standards and policies of the organization where it
might face moral dilemmas outside of the organization but within the macro-society where
it belongs.

1) What are the moral dilemmas that college students like you usually encounter?
Could you identify what type/s of dilemma under which your dilemmas fall?

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION

2) Recall atleast three experiences that made you feel problematic, distressed, and
confused. Evaluate whether each of these experiences is a dilemma or non-
dilemma. Also, assess whether that experience is a moral or non-moral dilemma.
a) How exactly did you respond to these problematic experiences?
b) Were you able to cope with them?
c) If given the chance to go back, would you change your decisions?
Why?

3) In the workplace, should employees experiencing moral dilemmas leave their job
no matter how compensating they are for them?

SYNTHESIS
A dilemma is a situation where a person is forced to choose between two or
more conflicting options, neither of which is acceptable.
Moral dilemmas arise due to inconsistency in our principles.
Moral Dilemmas vary in types such as epistemic and ontological; self-imposed
and world-imposed; obligation and prohibition; single agent and multi-person
Moral dilemmas are experience in the individual, organizational and systemic
levels.

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION

 At the end of the lesson, you are expected to:
• Create your own definition of a “good life”
• Define what ethics is
• Articulate the nature of ethics as philosophy and science
• Identify the different approaches to the study of ethics
• Appreciate the significance ethics as an academic endeavor

THE “GOOD LIFE” CHECKLIST

1) Check all items that define for you what good life is all about:

Complete Family Forgiveness

Peace of Mind God-centeredness
Beach Body Trusting Relationship
Mansion Academic Excellence
Luxury Car Travel and Leisure
High Intelligence Quotient (IQ) High Emotional Quotient (EQ)
Good Manners High-end Gadgets
Orderliness Blemish-free Skin
Honesty Stress-free Work
Stable Career Understanding Parents/Guardians
Handsome Boyfriend Liberty
Pretty Girlfriend Respect

2) You may add five (5) more other things that make you happy which are not found in the
list.

___________________________
___________________________
___________________________
___________________________

___________________________
DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION
To process the activity, please fulfill the following tasks:

1) Classify the items you checked or you added whether it is tangible (material) or
intangible (immaterial).
Ex.
Tangible Intangible
Toys Love

2) From your checklist, choose the top 5 things that makes life “good for you”. Rank them
from 1 (highest) to 5 (lowest). Explain your reasons for choosing them and ranking them
in that order.

3) Based on the above result, write a one-sentence summary of what makes good life for
you.

ETHICS is all about defining the ways to achieve and live a “good life”.

In the Ancient Times

For the primitive people, “good life” was never an

issue. They lived in a utopic world. When we say “utopia”,
we mean a “perfect place that has been designed so there
are no problems.” There was no Individualism; no Personal
Politics; no Selfishness.

They were living in harmony with nature.

There was an experience of universality, though the

concept did not exist. They have common beliefs; common
worldview; common practices; common way of life.
There were no issues on truth, goodness, and
beauty.

Civilization Period

When civilization sprang, people began to move beyond the confines of their
communities. They travelled across borders for trade, adventure, conquest, and
evangelization. They became scattered. They discovered that there is a bigger world beyond
their small communal spaces. They found out that there are other communities that exist
outside their borders.

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION

 Trade, which is done through barter, was not only on material goods but also on
intellectual goods (though priceless). The exchange of intellectual goods resulted to
comparison of one’s customs, beliefs, traditions, and many others. This prompted the idea
that “what for me is beautiful may not be beautiful anymore when compared with others” or
“what for me is good and true may not be the same case with others”.
People began to philosophize and think of the reason why there were lives more
beautiful than that of others. People began to compare their own life with others up to the
extent of discrimination.

Have you experienced being discriminated by someone because

your beliefs, customs, and practices aren’t the same?

Civilization has led man to think in a spatiotemporal dimension (time and space). The
people’s concept of time led them to interpret nothing into something. People began to fear
a non-existing entity. Inasmuch as the human mind is linear, there is always an issue on the
“connected to”. Human beings will always look for the cause and effect in all their actions.
They will always seek for the result in all their plans and activities.

Human beings now see the connection between his

present actions and the consequences thereof.

Goodness and beauty are considered always to be

connected with their daily activities – thus becomes
causal and material

This means that your present behavior will define your character in the future and
your eating habits today will surely have impact on your future appearance.

It is at this point that philosophy began to exist and started to flourish.

There is now a transition: from asking “What was the cause of the existence of all
things? Where did the world come from?” to “What makes a man a human person?”
Human beings now seek to understand the meaning of life and the importance of
good things.

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION

 We now ask several existential questions such as:

• WHAT SORT OF THING AM I?

• WHERE DO I COME FROM?
• TO WHERE SHALL I BE GOING?
• WHY AM I IN THIS WORLD?
• WHAT AM I LIVING FOR?
• WHAT IS MY FUTURE AND MY DESTINY?
• WHAT MUST I DO TO LIVE WELL AND BE HAPPY?

We are in constant search for the meaning of all our actions!

Etymologically, Ethics comes from the Greek word εθος (ethos) which means
“Customs, Usage, or Character”.
Ethics is a set of rules of human behavior, which has been influenced by the
standards set by the society or by himself in relation to his society (Reyes, 1989)
The field of ethics (or moral philosophy) involves systematizing, defending, and
recommending concepts of right and wrong behavior.
Ethics is a practical and normative science, based on reason, which studies human
acts, and provides norms for their goodness and badness (Timbreza, 1993)
As practical science,
❖ Ethics deals with a systematized body of knowledge that is applicable to human
action.
❖ The primary consideration of Ethics is the application of human knowledge and
its practicality to human experience.
❖ Thus, ethics is an indispensable part of man’s daily existence.
As a normative science,
❖ Ethics sets a basis or norm for the direction and regulation of human actions.
❖ It sets rules and guidelines to maintain a sense of direction to human actions
❖ It aids man in distinguishing whether one’s action can be considered good or
bad.

ETHICS…
❖ Is based on REASON. All ethical theories and all moral decisions must have its
basis from the power of reason.
❖ Is Different from RELIGION or THEOLOGY. Philosophy accepts truth on the
basis of reason. Those who do not believe in God may still have moral life.
Sometimes, those who believe in God may even be more immoral than those
who don’t.
❖ Studies HUMAN ACTS. Ethics particularly deals with voluntary human conduct.

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION

The Three Approaches to Ethics
Philosophers today usually divide ethical theories into three general subject areas:
metaethics, normative ethics, and applied ethics.
Meta-ethics. It deals with the nature of moral judgment. It looks at the origins and
meaning of ethical principles.
❖ Are ethical principles merely social inventions? Do they involve more than
expressions of our individual emotions? Meta-ethical answers to these
questions focus on the issues of universal truths, the will of God, the role
of reason in ethical judgments, and the meaning of ethical terms
themselves.

Normative ethics. It is concerned with the content of moral judgments and the
criteria for what is right or wrong. It takes on a more practical task, which is to
arrive at moral standards that regulate right and wrong conduct.
❖ This may involve articulating the good habits that we should acquire, the
duties that we should follow, or the consequences of our behavior on
others.

Applied ethics. It involves examining specific controversial issues, such as abortion,

infanticide, animal rights, environmental concerns, homosexuality, capital
punishment, or nuclear war.

Based on the given definition, what benefits can you get from
studying the ethics course?

There are several compelling reasons for you to study Ethics. These are:
Ethics is the very investigation of the meaning of life.
You will be guided in understanding what real happiness is
It will help you understand that man’s ultimate goal is not acquisition of material
goods rather his actual fulfilment lies in the development of the moral quality
It provides for you an idea of what right living is all about and the importance of
acquiring good moral character
It can give the necessary guidelines for the acquisition of his goal.
Character-building

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION

 Our concept of goodness has changed in the
course of time. Goodness before was gauged on the
basis moral norms, i.e, Maria is living a good life
because she is honest and kind. But when we began
to taste a more pleasurable life through
technological advances, our concept of goodness is
now becoming dependent to physical pleasures.
Hence, we begin to look at things as moral in their
capacity to provide pleasure and prevent pain. We
are now inclined to a hedonistic lifestyle.

The present era created a situation where Ethics has to be redefined and echoed to
every individual!

At this juncture, you are expected to do the following tasks!

1) Go back to your answers on the two pop-up questions.
❖ Have you experienced being discriminated by someone because your
beliefs, customs, and practices aren’t the same?
❖ Based on the given definition, what benefits can you get from studying the
ethics course?
Would you like to add some more to your answers? If yes, please do so.
2) Identify five things in your life that may drive you to redefine ethics. (It may be an
experience, a habit, a belief, etc.)
3) Comment on this statement:
“When man becomes civilized, the more he actually becomes uncivilized”

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION

 Good Life was not an issue among the primitive people in the ancient times. In the
civilization era, it became a point of inquiry when people began to compare their
ideas, beliefs, customs, and traditions with others.
Civilization has led man to think in a spatiotemporal dimension (time and space).
Human beings now see the connection between his present actions and the
consequences thereof. Goodness and beauty are considered always to be connected
with their daily activities – thus becomes causal and material.
Ethics involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and
wrong behavior. It is both a practical and normative science. It is based on reason,
different from religion or theology and it studies human acts. The three approaches
to ethics are meta-ethics, normative ethics, and applied ethics.
The present era, influence by a hedonistic mentality, created a situation where Ethics
has to be redefined and echoed to every individual!

SUPPLEMENTAL READING

Carino, J.V. (2018). Ethics and Philosophy and Ethics and Critical Thinking. In
Fundamentals of Ethics. C&E Publishing, Inc. 1-12; 18-27.

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION

 At the end of the lesson, you are expected to:
• Explain the role of conscience and law as norms of morality
• Apply the principle of double effect in a concrete moral experience

IF I FOLLOW MY CONSCIENCE AND THE LAW

It’s not always easy to choose to do what is right, but if you listen to your conscience and
consult the law, you will usually know what choice you should make. For each of the
following items, describe the choice you should make. Include two additional temptations
you might face and the choice you should make in the face of each.

TEMPTATION MY CONSCIENCE TELLS ME THE LAW PROVIDES

My mom caught me in a lie. I
can lie again to cover up my
first lie.
My friends want me to help
them cheat on a test
The cashier at the store gave
me back an extra ten dollars
with my change.
My friends are spreading a
rumor about one of our
classmates.
I can download music for free
instead of buying the songs I
want.
My friend wants me to help
cover for her so she can go to
a party that her parents don’t
want her to go to.
My parents told me not to go to
a party that I really want to go
to. I can do it anyway; they’ll
never know.
DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION
 I found an expensive MP3
player in class. I think I know
who it belongs to, but I’d love
to just keep it for myself.

The Norms of Morality are the criteria of judgment about the sorts of person we ought
to be and the sorts of action we ought to perform. It refers to the quality of things manifesting
their conformity or non-conformity with the norm or criteria. (that which conforms is good
or moral, that which do not conform is evil or immoral)

The subjective norm of morality – Conscience

The objective norm of morality – Law (Natural)

CONSCIENCE

Conscience is the subjective/proximate norm

of morality. It is proximate because it is what directly
confronts an action as good or bad. Its functions are
to examine/investigate, to judge, to pass punishment
on our moral actions. It approves & commends;
reproaches & condemns; forbids & commands;
accuses & absolves.

Conscience is derived from the Latin words “con”

plus “scientia” which means “with knowledge” of what
is right or wrong or “trial of oneself” both in
accusation and in defense. It is the “inner or little
voice of God in man” crying out man’s moral
obligations and telling him what to do and what to
avoid in the moral order. It is an act of the practical
judgment of reason deciding upon an individual
action as good and to be performed or as evil and to be avoided.

According to Erich Fromm, conscience enables the person to know what ought to be
done in order to become his own self. Conscience becomes the reason why the human person
becomes aware of the goals of life, as well as the norms for the attainment of such goals.
Thomas Aquinas adds: “Man’s conscience is also responsible for making the human person
aware of the welfare and dignity of the other persons”.

Kinds of Conscience
DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION
 Antecedent Conscience judgment is passed before an action is
performed.

Consequent Conscience judgment is passed after an action is

performed.

Right/True Conscience judges what is really good as good and

what is really evil as evil according to the
true principles of morality.

Erroneous/ False Conscience judges what is really bad as good and vice
versa according to a false interpretation of
the moral principles.

Certain conscience a subjective assurance of the lawfulness

or unlawfulness of certain actions to be
done or to be omitted.

Doubtful conscience a vacillating conscience, which is unable to

form a definite judgment on a certain
action.

A doubtful conscience must first be

allowed to settle its doubts before an
action is performed.

Lax conscience is one which refuses to be bothered about

the distinction of good and evil.

It tends to follow the easy way and to find

excuses for omissions and mistakes.
These are people who act on the impulse of
“bahala na” on matters of morals.

Scrupulous conscience is a rigorous conscience, extremely afraid

of committing evil.

A scrupulous conscience is meticulous and

wants incontrovertible proofs before it
acts. It is frequently the result of a
stubborn character.
For some, it merely means a serious
concern about moral perfection.

One has the obligation to cultivate a true and certain conscience!

1) By studying and searching for truths in the laws and in the sciences. Overcoming
ignorance and error in moral matters.
2) Cultivating good habits. Overcoming doubts.
3) By militating against evil, condemning and fighting against it.
DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION
 4) One must learn how to use properly his/her freedom.

What causes erroneous conscience?

1. A mistake along the process of practical reasoning especially with regard to remote
conclusions of the moral principles.
2. Ignorance of law
3. Ignorance of the fact and other circumstances modifying human action.
4. Ignorance invoving future consequences, especially those dependent on the free will
of others.
LAW

It is an ordinance of reason directed towards

the common good and promulgated by the one who
has the care of the community or in authority.

Elements:

1) Ordinance/mandate – because it contains a decisive command to perform or to avoid

the performance of something.
2) Reasonable – a law should not be dictated by a despotic desire or momentary whim of
an authority. It must not be capricious, arbitrary, discriminatory and whimsical.
3) For the common good – means that that law should benefit all citizens and not the
exclusive benefit of some favored groups. it is the sum total of benefits derived by
individuals from the government and from the nation as a whole.
4) Promulgated – means the law must be officially published for the purpose of
informing the people. (published in Official gazette or newspaper of general
circulation)
5) Enacted by a competent authority – a person who is elected or appointed to make laws.
(Congress)

Kinds of Law

1) Eternal Law
• it is the Divine reason or the will of God commanding that the natural order of
things be preserved and forbidding that it be disturbed .
• it is the exemplar of Divine wisdom as directing all actions and movements.
•
Properties: Universal, Obligatory, Recognizable by Reason, Immutable
2) Natural Law
• it is man’s participation in the eternal law of God.
• it is an extension of the divine order of things as apprehended by human reason.
• are not written decrees; figuratively speaking, they are “written in the hearts of
men.” They are impressed in human nature by the author of nature.
• it refers to the nature of all created things which is the principle of movements
and action: chemical, biological, psychological, or rational.
• it is recognized by all men regardless of creed, race, culture, historical
circumstances.
• All agreed that there is an inner force that compels man towards good and away
from evil.”

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION

 •
Properties: Universal, Obligatory, Recognizable by Reason, Immutable
3) Human Positive Law
• are the laws which proceed from a properly constituted authority such as the
state or the church.
• this serve to supplement the provisions of the natural law in view of the special
needs of the community.

Properties:
• A human law should be in accord with the divine law.
• A human law should be in accord with the natural law.
• A human law must promote the common good.
• A human law must have a universal character.

Read the following case scenarios first:

1) Mrs. Griffin recently discovered that she had an ectopic pregnancy—the embryo was
implanted in her fallopian tube. Her physician admitted her to a Catholic medical center
for treatment and scheduled a salpingostomy (a surgery that makes an incision in the
fallopian tube through which the embryo is removed). But an ethics-savvy surgery
center nurse questioned whether that procedure was morally permissible given the
Catholic identity of the hospital. The nurse called the bioethics committee to inquire
whether the doctor should perform a salpingectomy (surgical removal of the fallopian
tube) instead, fearing that the Catholic Church considers a salpingostomy to be a direct
abortion.

2) Mr. Smith has advanced metastatic liver cancer with neoplasms in his bones that
cause excruciating pain. He has built up tolerance for virtually all pain medications;
his doctors believe that one of the few remaining ways to alleviate his pain is to sedate
him. Mr. Smith has said that he no longer wants any curative treatments. The Catholic
hospital in which Mr. Smith is receiving care has a strong stance against euthanasia
and physician-assisted suicide. Members of Mr. Smith family approach his doctors and
unanimously request, "Please end his life so he can stop suffering."

What morally viable options are available for the patients and health care professionals?

Principle of Double Effect

The history of the principle of double effect dates at least as

far back as the work of St. Thomas Aquinas. Although St. Thomas
did not use the term "double effect" or refer to the principle, he
used the concept in justifying killing in self-defense [1]. In so doing,
he recognized the bad effect (death of the assailant) and the good
effect (preservation of the victim's life). Can one justifiably kill an
attacker to save his or her life? St. Thomas answered in the
affirmative. Likewise those who use the principle of double effect

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION

today attempt to discern the rightness or wrongness of actions that will have both good and
bad (evil) effects.

To make such a determination, one must analyze an action on the basis of four
conditions; all of which must be met for the action to be morally justifiable. The conditions of
the principle of double effect are the following:
1) The act-in-itself cannot be morally wrong or intrinsically evil.
2) The bad effect cannot cause the good effect.
3) The agent cannot intend the bad effect.
4) The bad effect cannot outweigh the good effect; there is a proportionate reason to
tolerate the bad effect.

In analyzing acts within the framework of the four conditions, one considers that, if the
act satisfies the four conditions, then the act is indirect and, therefore, morally licit. If,
however, the act does not fulfill these four conditions (or, according to some interpretations,
just the first two conditions) the act is direct and, therefore, the act is not morally licit. Some
argue in fact that the first three conditions are three statements of the same moral
proposition: the act cannot be intrinsically evil.

Let’s go back to the case scenarios and try to see how the principle of double effect
works.

1) In Mrs. Griffin’s case, a traditional application of the principle indicates that

salpingostomies are direct abortions whereas salpingectomies are indirect abortions.
This conclusion is not without controversy, especially given the development of
salpingostomy as the standard of care for ectopic pregnancy. Salpingostomy "directly"
attacks the developing embryo, so it does not satisfy the first condition.
• A surgeon performing a salpingectomy, however, removes the pathological tissue
(fallopian tube), which does fulfill the first condition.
• The death of the embryo does not cause, in and of itself, the good effect—preservation
of the mother's life; it is the removal of the pathological tissue that causes the good
effect, thus fulfilling condition 2.
• The agent (physician or mother who consents to the procedure) does not intend the
death of the embryo, but rather intends the cure of the ailment, thus fulfilling condition
3.
• The last condition, whether there is a proportionate reason to tolerate the unintended
bad effect, asks if the good effect (preserving the life of the mother) outweighs the bad
effects—death of the embryo, and, incidentally with salpingectomy, reduction or
elimination of the mother's fertility. Proportionate reason will be discussed more
thoroughly below.

2) In Mr. Smith’s case, a traditional application of the principle of double effect indicates that
one can administer pain medicine even if the patient's death is a foreseen, unintended
consequence. How is this justifiable? Is this not euthanasia?
• Here, the administration of pain or sedative medicine is not, in and of itself, morally
wrong (fulfilling condition 1).
• The death of Mr. Smith, were it to happen, does not cause his relief of pain (fulfilling
condition 2)—the sedative medicine accomplishes this.
• The agent, the physician or Mr. Smith 's surrogate decision maker, does not intend on
the death of Mr. Smith (fulfilling condition 3).

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION

 • This last statement may seem to contradict the statement provided by the patient's
family. Nevertheless, a close examination of the intent behind their statement is his
relief from suffering caused by his pain. Arguably, Mr. Smith's family sees his death as
the only means to achieve this end or is unable to distinguish between pain relief and
death. Again, is there a proportionate reason for tolerating the bad outcome that would
permit sedating Mr. Smith?

Proportionate Reason

Proportionate reason grounds the fourth condition of

the principle of double effect. How does one determine
whether the good effect outweighs the bad effect? The
phrasing of this question is immediately problematic.
One of the main critiques of proportionate reason is its
mathematical connotation: how can a good effect outweigh a bad effect, especially in end-of-
life decisions where the bad effect is often death? Proportionate reason is a moral principle
that one may employ to determine objectively and concretely the rightness or wrongness of
actions.
One should not understand proportionate reason in purely mathematical terms, but
rather as a balance between values and disvalues in determining whether the means (an act)
is proportionate to the intended end or reason. The "reason" (ratio) here is not "some serious
reason" that an agent identifies to justify the evil effect of the act; alternatively, what many
commentators "mean by 'reason' is a concrete value which is at stake in the act of an agent".
The term "proportionate" means a formal relation between the reason for the act and the
premoral values and disvalues in the act.
In terms of our cases, one sees that proportionate reason exists in both.
1) In Mrs. Griffin's case, one may claim that a salpingectomy fulfills the fourth condition
because the good effect (preservation of her life) outweighs the bad effect (death of the
embryo). Because the means (removal of pathological tissue) is indirectly ending the early
life of the embryo, such means are proportionate to the intended end; there is a non-
contradiction between the means and the end. What about a salpingostomy? Or
administering methotrexate? The permissibility of salpingostomy requires a re-
interpretation of the act in question and a determination of whether it passes the first two
conditions. Is a salpingostomy a direct abortion?

2) In Mr. Smith 's case, one may argue that terminal sedation fulfills the fourth condition
because the good effect (relief of pain) outweighs the bad effect (death of Mr. Smith). Here,
the means (palliative sedation) is proportionate to the end (relief from pain) insofar as it
is the last remaining option. The question of alternatives can help physicians and
surrogate decision makers discern what the true intentions behind certain requests are.
Thus, a physician might ask Mr. Smith 's decision maker, "If there were any other way to
relieve Mr. Smith of his pain, would you want to pursue that option?" If he or she answers
yes, then one can claim that his or her intent is not in the death of Mr. Smith, but relief of
Mr. Smith 's pain. The agent cannot intend both to cause the patient's death and relieve his
pain. In this hypothetical case, if there are no alternatives to relieving his pain except for
sedating him, there is a proportionate reason to do so, and such an act is not euthanasia
(direct killing of Mr. Smith).

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION

 CASE STUDY
Ms. Richards was a 50-year-old woman followed by oncology for her widely metastatic
lung cancer. Her disease was refractory to treatment and progressed; she grew weaker.
She chose comfort-focused care and refused further cytotoxic therapy. Extensive osseous
involvement began to cause her excruciating bone pain at multiple sites, and the pain
progressed despite several courses of palliative radiation therapy, bisphosphonates, and
increasing doses of opioids and co-analgesic medications. She was dyspneic and anxious,
with both symptoms aggravated by her severe pain. She was admitted to a local hospital for
general decline, dehydration, and severe pain. Increasing doses of intermittent intravenous
morphine were administered with suboptimal effect, and 2 days after admission, a
continuous morphine infusion with prn clinician-administered boluses was ordered. After
aggressive dose titration, at last, the patient seemed to achieve an acceptable level of
comfort and calm. She remained intermittently awake and interacted with family at her
bedside, but some of the staff was uncomfortable administering increasingly high doses of
opioid, fearing that they would hasten the patient’s death.
Are these nurses ethically justified in giving very high doses of opioids for pain
at the end of life?
Instruction: Analyze the case and answer the question above applying the principle of double
effect.

The Norms of Morality are the criteria of judgment about the sorts of person
we ought to be and the sorts of action we ought to perform.
Conscience, the subjective norm of morality, functions to examine/investigate,
to judge, to pass punishment on our moral actions. It approves & commends;
reproaches & condemns; forbids & commands; accuses & absolves.
Law, the objective norm of morality, is an ordinance of reason directed towards
the common good and promulgated by the one who has the care of the
community or in authority.
The doctrine (or principle) of double effect is often invoked to explain the
permissibility of an action that causes a serious harm, such as the death of a
human being, as a side effect of promoting some good end. According to the
principle of double effect, sometimes it is permissible to cause a harm as a side
effect (or “double effect”) of bringing about a good result even though it would
not be permissible to cause such a harm as a means to bringing about the same
good end.

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION

 At the end of the topic, you are expected to:
• State the ethical principles on modifiers of human acts applicable to a moral
experience.
• Determine the modifier/s present in a moral experience.
• Apply the ethical principles governing the modifiers of human acts in
determining the degree of moral responsibility in moral situations.

Find time to watch the full movie or video clips of “Miracle in Cell No. 7”
whether in its original Korean or Filipino Adaptation in YouTube or
other media sharing sites.

Is the father who got convicted and executed morally responsible for
the death of the little girl? Why? Why not?
Did he deserve to be executed?

As moral agents, are we always fully responsible for our actions? Are the impacts of
all our actions, be it positive or negative, always imputable (ascribable, attributable,
chargeable) to us? What happens when one or all of the three constituents of human acts are
absent?
There are certain factors or modifiers that affect human acts. They as well determine
the degree of our moral responsibility over the results of our actions.
DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION
1) IGNORANCE - in general, it is the lack of knowledge regarding a certain thing.

IGNORANCE

IGNORANCE IN ITS IGNORANCE IN ITS IGNORANCE IN ITS

OBJECT SUBJECT RESULT

1) IGNORANCE OF LAW 1) VINCIBLE IGNORANCE 1) ANTECEDENT

is the ignorance in the (CONQUERABLE IGNORANCE
existence of a duty, rule or IGNORANCE) that which precedes all
regulation. This may include ❖ ignorance that can be consent of the will
ignorance of penalties supplanted by knowledge ex. The chef served a
attached to the law or rule. by the use of ordinary poisonous mushroom not
diligence - ignorance is knowing that it can cause
Ex. Mang Kanor and Aling due to lack of proper the death of its customers
Ising came to Vigan for the diligence.
first time, aboard an (SUV).
They did not know that the 1.a) Simply vincible- some 2) CONCOMITANT
City Government of Vigan effort has been done but not IGNORANCE
strictly prohibits motorized enough to dispel the accompanies an act that
vehicles from passing ignorance would have been performed
through Calle Crisologo. As 1.b) Crass or Supine- result even if the ignorance did
a result they were of total or nearly lack of not exist.
apprehended. effort to dispel it
1.c) Affected- if positive ex. A student misses his
effort has been done to ethics class but even if he
2) IGNORANCE OF FACT knows, he will still miss
retain the ignorance.
Is the ignorance of nature or
circumstances of an act as
2) INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE 3) CONSEQUENT
forbidden
- ignorance that ordinary IGNORANCE
and proper diligence cannot
Ex. Sgt. Dalisay shot to
dispel. This is attributable to that which follows upon the
death retired Cpl. Borja, a
2 causes: act of the will
war veteran, due to the
latter’s alleged provocative
(a) the person has no ex. A doctor suspects that
actions. Sgt. Dalisay did not
realization of his lack of the patient’s disease is
know that Cpl. Borja is knowledge cancerous but deliberately
suffering from PTSD and (b) the person who realizes refrain from making sure,
war shock (shell shock) and his ignorance finds his effort and does not inform the
that he was unarmed. ineffective or nearly lack of patient
effort to dispel it

PRINCIPLES GOVERNING IGNORANCE

1) Invincible ignorance renders an act involuntary. A person cannot be held morally

responsible/liable if he/she is not aware of the state of his/her ignorance.
2) Vincible ignorance does not destroy, but lessens the voluntariness and corresponding
accountability over the act.
23) Affected/Pretended ignorance does not excuse a person from his/her bad actions; it
actually increases their malice.

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION

1) PASSION or CONCUPISCENCE – is a feeling, such as anger, of fear, of joy, or of
despair. It refers more specially to those bodily appetites or tendencies as experienced.

PASSION

ANTECEDENT PASSION CONSEQUENT PASSION

• occurs when it springs into action follows the free determination of the act
unstimulated by the will. and is freely admitted and consented to
• is that which precedes the placing of an and deliberately aroused. - the will directly
action according to the passion or in or indirectly stirs them up - however great
spite of it. does not lessen the voluntariness since it
• If a lawful act is placed despite the is willed directly or indirectly.
passion, the will has achieved greater
freedom and gained merit.
ex. Planned revenge or assassination,
For example, a young man who continues
reading pornography, singing hymns of
to study and pray in spite of sexual passion
praise
that he did not arouse has made his action
more voluntary and meritorious since he
has asserted his freedom at some cost.

PRINCIPLES GOVERNING PASSIONS

1) Antecedent Passions do not always destroy voluntariness, but they diminish accountability
for the resultant act. Example: Sa sobrang saya mo (passion) na nakita yung pangalan mo sa
official list ng honor students, naitulak mo yung bestfriend mo at siya ay nagalusan.
Accountable ka, though hindi fully, sa nangyari sa bestfriend dahil hindi naman siya
intentional.
2) Consequent passions do not lessen voluntariness, but may even increase accountability.
Ito ay dahil intentional na inarouse mo yung passions mo.

3) FEAR – is a mental agitation brought on by the apprehension of some present or imminent

danger. It is the disturbance of the mind of a person who is confronted by an impending harm
to himself or loved ones (Agapay 1991:24) Fear maybe slight or grave.
Note: May pagkakaiba ang 1) Ginawa mo na “may” takot at 2) Ginawa mo “dahil sa” takot.
PRINCIPLES GOVERNING FEAR
1) Acts done “with” fear are voluntary. The person concerned remains morally responsible of
his/her action, whether good or bad, right or wrong.
❖ Nagcheat ka dahil “may takot” kang bumagsak. The fear does not justify your act of
cheating.
❖ Tinolerate mo nalang yung pangangaliwa ng kasintahan mo dahil “may takot” ka na
hiwalayan ka niya. The fear does not justify your act of toleration.

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION

 ❖ Itinago mo ang iyong asawa na pinaghahanap ng batas dahil sa crime of murder dahil
“may takot” mo na lumaki ang mga anak mo na walang ang ama nila sa kanilang tabi,.
The fear does not justify your act of obstructing justice.
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.
❖ You were having classes in the fifth floor when suddenly fire razed so quickly in the
storage room near the classrooms. The fire alarm rang. Everybody is in panic. As you
rushed going down through the fire exit, you accidentally pushed one of your
classmates which resulted to a serious physical injury. Here, the panic justifies your
act of pushing your classmate.
❖ You are in a money heist situation. Nakatutok yung baril sayo, you were asked to open
the vault of the bank (of which you are not allowed) and you did exactly what was
asked. Your act of opening the bank vault will be morally justified by the existence of
intense fear of getting shot.

4) VIOLENCE – is an external force applied by a free cause for the purpose of compelling a
person to perform an act which is against his will.
PRINCIPLE GOVERNING VIOLENCE
1) Any action resulting from violence is simply involuntary. Let it be clear, however, that this
does not justify violence.
❖ For example, you are being forced to take down your post that aims to raise your
concerns about online classes amidst pandemic by professors who throw violent
words at you and threaten to fail you. If you ever delete the post even if the post is
valid, your act of deleting will remain involuntary because you were violently forced.

5) HABIT – is a lasting readiness and facility, born of frequently repeated acts, for acting in
a certain manner.
PRINCIPLE GOVERNING HABIT
1) Habits do not destroy voluntariness and acts from habit are always voluntary, at least in
cause, as long as the habit is allowed to endure.

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION

CASE ANALYSES
Instruction: Read the following cases and answer the questions that follow. You are expected
to present your answers in a logical form: 1) State the salient facts of the case, 2) State the
principle (from the principles pertaining to the modifiers of human acts discussed above, and
3) Your conclusive/categorical answer based on number 1 and 2 (ex. Premises considered, A
is morally liable for the death of C)
a. While his wife was on a 2-year scholarship abroad, Bellamy was having an affair
with his maid Echo. Realizing that the affair was going nowhere, Echo told Bellamy
that she was going back to the province to marry her childhood sweetheart. Clouded
by anger and jealousy, Bellamy strangled Echo to death while she was sleeping in
the maid’s quarters. The following day, Bellamy was found catatonic (unresponsive)
inside the maid’s quarters. He was brought to the National Center for Mental Health
(NCMH) where he was diagnosed to be mentally unstable. Charged with murder,
Bellamy pleaded insanity as a defense. Is Bellamy morally liable for the death of
Echo?

b. Abby, a diagnosed schizophrenic, drowns five of her young children in the bathtub.
Abby promptly called the police station and informed them that her children are
dead. When the police officers arrive at Abby’s house, she informs them that she
killed her children so that they could leave this earth and enter heaven. What is the
moral liability of Abby over the death of her children?

c. Octavia of Skaikru, having defeated the champions of all other clans in a so called
“conclave” (a battle to death for leadership). Subsequently, she became the
commander to whom all clans should defer. She was aware that not all clans were
happy with the outcome of the conclave and that there is a possibility for an uprising.
With fear that some members of the clans would lead an uprising against here rule,
she ordered the execution of suspected opposition members. What is her moral
liability on the said execution?

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION

 At the end of the topic, you are expected to:
• State the ethical principles on modifiers of human acts applicable to a moral
experience.
• Determine the modifier/s present in a moral experience.
• Apply the ethical principles governing the modifiers of human acts in
determining the degree of moral responsibility in moral situations.

Find time to watch the full movie or video clips of “Miracle in Cell No. 7”
whether in its original Korean or Filipino Adaptation in YouTube or
other media sharing sites.

Is the father who got convicted and executed morally responsible for
the death of the little girl? Why? Why not?
Did he deserve to be executed?

As moral agents, are we always fully responsible for our actions? Are the impacts of
all our actions, be it positive or negative, always imputable (ascribable, attributable,
chargeable) to us? What happens when one or all of the three constituents of human acts are
absent?
There are certain factors or modifiers that affect human acts. They as well determine
the degree of our moral responsibility over the results of our actions.
DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION
1) IGNORANCE - in general, it is the lack of knowledge regarding a certain thing.

IGNORANCE

IGNORANCE IN ITS IGNORANCE IN ITS IGNORANCE IN ITS

OBJECT SUBJECT RESULT

1) IGNORANCE OF LAW 1) VINCIBLE IGNORANCE 1) ANTECEDENT

is the ignorance in the (CONQUERABLE IGNORANCE
existence of a duty, rule or IGNORANCE) that which precedes all
regulation. This may include ❖ ignorance that can be consent of the will
ignorance of penalties supplanted by knowledge ex. The chef served a
attached to the law or rule. by the use of ordinary poisonous mushroom not
diligence - ignorance is knowing that it can cause
Ex. Mang Kanor and Aling due to lack of proper the death of its customers
Ising came to Vigan for the diligence.
first time, aboard an (SUV).
They did not know that the 1.a) Simply vincible- some 2) CONCOMITANT
City Government of Vigan effort has been done but not IGNORANCE
strictly prohibits motorized enough to dispel the accompanies an act that
vehicles from passing ignorance would have been performed
through Calle Crisologo. As 1.b) Crass or Supine- result even if the ignorance did
a result they were of total or nearly lack of not exist.
apprehended. effort to dispel it
1.c) Affected- if positive ex. A student misses his
effort has been done to ethics class but even if he
2) IGNORANCE OF FACT knows, he will still miss
retain the ignorance.
Is the ignorance of nature or
circumstances of an act as
2) INVINCIBLE IGNORANCE 3) CONSEQUENT
forbidden
- ignorance that ordinary IGNORANCE
and proper diligence cannot
Ex. Sgt. Dalisay shot to
dispel. This is attributable to that which follows upon the
death retired Cpl. Borja, a
2 causes: act of the will
war veteran, due to the
latter’s alleged provocative
(a) the person has no ex. A doctor suspects that
actions. Sgt. Dalisay did not
realization of his lack of the patient’s disease is
know that Cpl. Borja is knowledge cancerous but deliberately
suffering from PTSD and (b) the person who realizes refrain from making sure,
war shock (shell shock) and his ignorance finds his effort and does not inform the
that he was unarmed. ineffective or nearly lack of patient
effort to dispel it

PRINCIPLES GOVERNING IGNORANCE

1) Invincible ignorance renders an act involuntary. A person cannot be held morally

responsible/liable if he/she is not aware of the state of his/her ignorance.
2) Vincible ignorance does not destroy, but lessens the voluntariness and corresponding
accountability over the act.
23) Affected/Pretended ignorance does not excuse a person from his/her bad actions; it
actually increases their malice.

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION

1) PASSION or CONCUPISCENCE – is a feeling, such as anger, of fear, of joy, or of
despair. It refers more specially to those bodily appetites or tendencies as experienced.

PASSION

ANTECEDENT PASSION CONSEQUENT PASSION

• occurs when it springs into action follows the free determination of the act
unstimulated by the will. and is freely admitted and consented to
• is that which precedes the placing of an and deliberately aroused. - the will directly
action according to the passion or in or indirectly stirs them up - however great
spite of it. does not lessen the voluntariness since it
• If a lawful act is placed despite the is willed directly or indirectly.
passion, the will has achieved greater
freedom and gained merit.
ex. Planned revenge or assassination,
For example, a young man who continues
reading pornography, singing hymns of
to study and pray in spite of sexual passion
praise
that he did not arouse has made his action
more voluntary and meritorious since he
has asserted his freedom at some cost.

PRINCIPLES GOVERNING PASSIONS

1) Antecedent Passions do not always destroy voluntariness, but they diminish accountability
for the resultant act. Example: Sa sobrang saya mo (passion) na nakita yung pangalan mo sa
official list ng honor students, naitulak mo yung bestfriend mo at siya ay nagalusan.
Accountable ka, though hindi fully, sa nangyari sa bestfriend dahil hindi naman siya
intentional.
2) Consequent passions do not lessen voluntariness, but may even increase accountability.
Ito ay dahil intentional na inarouse mo yung passions mo.

3) FEAR – is a mental agitation brought on by the apprehension of some present or imminent

danger. It is the disturbance of the mind of a person who is confronted by an impending harm
to himself or loved ones (Agapay 1991:24) Fear maybe slight or grave.
Note: May pagkakaiba ang 1) Ginawa mo na “may” takot at 2) Ginawa mo “dahil sa” takot.
PRINCIPLES GOVERNING FEAR
1) Acts done “with” fear are voluntary. The person concerned remains morally responsible of
his/her action, whether good or bad, right or wrong.
❖ Nagcheat ka dahil “may takot” kang bumagsak. The fear does not justify your act of
cheating.
❖ Tinolerate mo nalang yung pangangaliwa ng kasintahan mo dahil “may takot” ka na
hiwalayan ka niya. The fear does not justify your act of toleration.

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION

 ❖ Itinago mo ang iyong asawa na pinaghahanap ng batas dahil sa crime of murder dahil
“may takot” mo na lumaki ang mga anak mo na walang ang ama nila sa kanilang tabi,.
The fear does not justify your act of obstructing justice.
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.
❖ You were having classes in the fifth floor when suddenly fire razed so quickly in the
storage room near the classrooms. The fire alarm rang. Everybody is in panic. As you
rushed going down through the fire exit, you accidentally pushed one of your
classmates which resulted to a serious physical injury. Here, the panic justifies your
act of pushing your classmate.
❖ You are in a money heist situation. Nakatutok yung baril sayo, you were asked to open
the vault of the bank (of which you are not allowed) and you did exactly what was
asked. Your act of opening the bank vault will be morally justified by the existence of
intense fear of getting shot.

4) VIOLENCE – is an external force applied by a free cause for the purpose of compelling a
person to perform an act which is against his will.
PRINCIPLE GOVERNING VIOLENCE
1) Any action resulting from violence is simply involuntary. Let it be clear, however, that this
does not justify violence.
❖ For example, you are being forced to take down your post that aims to raise your
concerns about online classes amidst pandemic by professors who throw violent
words at you and threaten to fail you. If you ever delete the post even if the post is
valid, your act of deleting will remain involuntary because you were violently forced.

5) HABIT – is a lasting readiness and facility, born of frequently repeated acts, for acting in
a certain manner.
PRINCIPLE GOVERNING HABIT
1) Habits do not destroy voluntariness and acts from habit are always voluntary, at least in
cause, as long as the habit is allowed to endure.

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION

CASE ANALYSES
Instruction: Read the following cases and answer the questions that follow. You are expected
to present your answers in a logical form: 1) State the salient facts of the case, 2) State the
principle (from the principles pertaining to the modifiers of human acts discussed above, and
3) Your conclusive/categorical answer based on number 1 and 2 (ex. Premises considered, A
is morally liable for the death of C)
a. While his wife was on a 2-year scholarship abroad, Bellamy was having an affair
with his maid Echo. Realizing that the affair was going nowhere, Echo told Bellamy
that she was going back to the province to marry her childhood sweetheart. Clouded
by anger and jealousy, Bellamy strangled Echo to death while she was sleeping in
the maid’s quarters. The following day, Bellamy was found catatonic (unresponsive)
inside the maid’s quarters. He was brought to the National Center for Mental Health
(NCMH) where he was diagnosed to be mentally unstable. Charged with murder,
Bellamy pleaded insanity as a defense. Is Bellamy morally liable for the death of
Echo?

b. Abby, a diagnosed schizophrenic, drowns five of her young children in the bathtub.
Abby promptly called the police station and informed them that her children are
dead. When the police officers arrive at Abby’s house, she informs them that she
killed her children so that they could leave this earth and enter heaven. What is the
moral liability of Abby over the death of her children?

c. Octavia of Skaikru, having defeated the champions of all other clans in a so called
“conclave” (a battle to death for leadership). Subsequently, she became the
commander to whom all clans should defer. She was aware that not all clans were
happy with the outcome of the conclave and that there is a possibility for an uprising.
With fear that some members of the clans would lead an uprising against here rule,
she ordered the execution of suspected opposition members. What is her moral
liability on the said execution?

DSSP 2020 | NOT FOR SALE/UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION