Human Act

Act of Man versus Human Act

Says Fr. Coppens, “(h)uman acts are those of which a man is master, which he has the powerof
doing or not doing as he pleases”. In the words of Panizo, “(h)uman acts are those acts which proceed
from man as a rational being”. Observing prescribed diet, tutoring the slow learners and preparing for
board exams are examples of human acts. In other words, human acts are the acts of a moral agent.
Hence, “actions committed by unconscious and insane persons, infants, or by those who are physically
forced to do something, are not considered as human acts but acts of man”. Likewise, “actions which
merely happen in the body or through the body without the awareness of the mind or the control of the
will are not human acts but merely acts of man”.

The Determinants of the Morality of Human Act

Rev. Coppens, S.J. says that to know whether an individual human act is morally good, three
things are considered. These are called the determinants of morality, namely, a) the object of the act, b)
the end or purpose and c) its circumstances.
The object of an act is the thing done. In reality, it is not distinct from the act itself; for we
cannot act without doing something, and the thing that is done is the object of the act; say, of going,
eating, praising, etc. The act or object may be viewed as containing a further specification – e.g. going to
church, praising God, eating meat. Now, an act thus specified may, when considered in itself, be good,
bad or indifferent; thus, to praise God is good it itself, to blaspheme is bad in itself and to eat meat is
itself an indifferent act. But for an individual human act to be good, its object, whether considered in
itself or as further specified, must be free from all defect; it must be good, or at least indifferent.
The end or purpose intended by the agent is the second determinant of an act’s morality. The
end here spoken of is not the end of the work, for that pertains to the object, but the end of the
workman or agent. No matter how good the object of an act may be, if the end intended is bad, the act
is hereby vitiated, spoiled or impaired. Thus, to praise God is good in itself, but if in so acting the
intention would be to play the hypocrite, the act is morally bad. This holds true whether the vicious end
is the nearest, remote or last end; whether it be actually or only virtually intended. On the other hand, a
good end, though ever so elevated, cannot justify a bad act; in other words, we are never allowed to do
evil that good may result from there.
The circumstances of time, place and persons have their part in determining the morality of an
individual act. The moral character of an act may be so affected may be so affected by attendant
circumstances, that an act of good in itself may be evil when accompanied by certain circumstances; for
instance, it is good to give drink to the thirsty man is morally weak, and the drink is intoxicating, the act
may be evil.

The object of the act is the act itself. The following are instances: using the name of God with
reverence; sincerely invoking God’s name or the names of saints (the evil object is using the name of
God and the saints in vain), honouring one’s parent, going to Mass on days of obligation, saving human
life, respecting other’s rights and property, having pure acts and thoughts, being true to maritam
commitments, telling the truth, etc.

The end or purpose is the intention of acting subject, or what inspires the acting subject. For
example, rendering free service to a neighbor with the intention of boasting about it. Or helping a
neighbour inspired by love of God. The first instance is immoral, while the second is moral. The guiding
rule is the end does not justify the mean. The intention of helping a neighbor, say giving food, by
stealing the food from another neighbor, is never justified.

The circumstances, including the consequences, refer to the time, place, person, and conditions
surrounding the moral act. They either increase or diminish the moral goodness or evil of human acts.

A morally good act requires the goodness of the object, of the end, and the circumstances together. An
evil end corrupts the action, even if the object is good in itself (such as praying and fasting “in order to
be seen by men”).