ETHICS

First Semester/ A.Y. 2020-2021

http://www.drewmeyersinsights.com/2017/10/01/direct-manager-instructing-something-disagreed-handle/

Course Number: GE 107

Course Description: This course is a study of morality, including the theory of right
and wrong behavior, the theory of value (goodness and badness), and the theory of virtue and
vice. Besides providing familiarity with the primary questions addressed within moral
philosophy and the most influential answers given by well-known philosophers, this course is
designed to help students develop their abilities to read, explicate, analyze, and evaluate
philosophical literature, write and express themselves well about their own ethical positions,
and think critically and analytically about ethical issues. 

Course Facilitator:
PROF. JAY LORD ASIS, MAT
Instructor

Facebook: JL Asis
Email: jlasis1984@gmail.com
Contact Number: 09123205675
MODULE 3.0
THE ENDS OF HUMAN ACTS
Overview:

A human act is always performed to an end. This chapter discusses ends in general,
and the ultimate end of human acts in particular.

Learning Objectives: At the end of the lesson the learners should be able to:

1. Discuss ends in general and the ultimate end of human acts in particular
2. Identify the different classifications of end
3. Discuss the nature of happiness and its kinds

Content:
ENDS IN GENERAL
End is both a termination and a goal of an activity. In human act, it is the state.
Human act is always performed for an end. It is that which completes or finishes a thing and
that it is for which the thing is finished.
A sculptor has reached the end of his work on a statue when the last bit of marble has
been chipped away; and he has reached the end in another sense, inasmuch as the finished
statue is the goal he set out to attain when he started is the goal he set out to attain when he
started the work. By an end we mean the end of an activity. In the example given, the work of
the sculptor, the active of making the statue (both in itself coming from interior plan and
purpose) is the activity considered.

Every activity tends toward an end. A tree tends to grow to full stature, maturity,
and fruitfulness: and this is the end of its activity of growth. A hungry dog seizing a bit of
beef evinces an activity of instinct for the meat as a good thing to have, as an ends by reason
of what we call natural laws. Thus, fire tends to burn, bodies tend to fall toward the center of
the earth, bodies at rest tend to remain at rest, and bodies in motion tend to remain in motion
of the same direction and velocity.

Principle Regarding Human Activity

• Every action is performed for the sake of a definite end or purpose.
• Every action is intended towards an ultimate end.
• Every doer moves himself towards and end which he thinks suitable to him.

KINDS OF APPETITE OR APPETENCY

Every activity tends towards an end; and thus every activity is a tendency. Now,
every tendency may be called an appetite, or more properly, appetency.
1.) Natural Appetency is that which exists without any sort of knowledge – as in plants
and lifeless things
 2.) Sense-appetency or sensual appetency is that which comes of knowledge and which
is stirred by sensation.

Example: hungry dog seizing meat (it is a usual tendency of a dog to seize meat by
way of smelling or using its sense of smell.

3.) Rational Appetency or Will is that which is stirred into action by intellectual
knowledge.

Example: The sculptor knows the statue to be desirable and he wills to make it. (The
sculptor is a rational being has both knowledge and free will. Every will-act, that is,
every human act, is the expression of rational appetency or will)

In Ethics, the end is that which is apprehended as good, as desirable, and which
attracts the human agent to the performance of the act. It is the agent’s motive and reason for
acting. It causes the agent to act, and, in so far, the end is the final cause of human act-a
cause called final, from the Latin word finis, which means end. The agent is the efficient
cause of his acts, for it is he that effects or performs them; but he would not affect them were
he not attracted by the end or final cause. No human act can exist, therefore, without a
final cause, that is to say, without and end apprehended by the agent as desirable or good
enough to attract the agent to action and to serve as his motive in the act.

The end or final cause of human acts must be apprehended as good. Evil cannot be
willed as such for its own sake. Evil is done only when it assumes the aspect of good, as
something that will bring satisfaction or will lead to it. This does not mean that a sinner
thinks he is acting virtuously when he commits a sin. On the contrary, he knows that the sin is
morally evil and that he is responsible for it. But the point is that the sin to which he consents
is apprehended as something that will bring present satisfaction, or will lead to it, and this is
judged by the agent as a greater good than that which is required by the moral law which
forbids the sin. Notice that it is a greater good that the sin is chosen. Of course, the agent’s
judgment in the matter is not sound; his sin will not lead to ultimate happiness or satisfaction,
but inasmuch as it is a judgment of the sin as good, it explains what is meant by the statement
that evil is not chosen as such, nor for its own sake, but only when it assumes the aspect of
good. In our sense, good is that which answers tendency or desire.

CLASSIFICATION OF ENDS

I. End of the Act and End of the Agent

1. End of the Act – the end toward which the act of its own nature tends.
2. End of the Agent – the end which the agent intends to achieve by his act.
The end of the act is the end towards which the act of its own nature tends. Thus, the
act of giving food and shelter to destitute persons tends of its nature towards the relief of
distress, and we say that the relief of distress is the end of the act. – The end of the agent is
the end which the agent (intention) intends to achieve by his act. Thus, the act of giving food
and shelter to destitute persons may be performed by the agent to increase his merit before
God, or as an act of penance for sins committed. Again, the agent may perform the act in
order to have it noticed by others, so that he may gain the reputation of a beneficent person.
Again, the act may be performed by an agent who merely wishes to relieve distress. In the
last case, the end of the agent coincides with the end of the act. In the other cases, the end of
the agent is different from the end of the act. When we speak of the end in Ethics, we usually
mean the end of the agent.

II. Proximate and Remote Ends

1. Proximate End – the end intended as the immediate outcome of an act.

2. Remote End – the end which the agent wishes to achieve later on, and toward
the attainment of which he employs the present act as means.

The proximate end is the end intended as the immediate outcome of an act. The
remote end is that which the agent wishes to achieve later on, and toward the attainment of
which he employs the present act as a means. Hence, a politician who gives money to the
poor, wishes for votes as a means to office. Thus, while publicity is his proximate end, votes
and election to office are remote ends.

III. Intermediate and Ultimate Ends

1. Intermediate End – an end, whether proximate or remote, willed as a mean to

a further end. This may either lead to another intermediate end or to an
ultimate end.
2. Ultimate or Last End – an end, whether proximate or remote, willed for its
own sake. It completes an act and stops further activity. It is also the drive that
moves a person to act and undertake even difficult and dangerous task.

An end, whether proximate or remote, is willed either for its own sake or as a means
to end more remote. If it is willed for its own sake, it is a last or ultimate end, and if it is
willed as means to a further end, it is an intermediate end.

To illustrate: a man gives money to the poor. He gives the money to gain favorable
notice in the newspapers (proximate and intermediate end); he wills election for the
prominence, power, and wealth which the office will give him (remote and ultimate end).
This example shows us a chain or series of ends; and, since the ultimate end of the series of
ends; and, since the ultimate end of the series is not the general or unconditioned end of the
man’s whole life and all its human acts, but ultimately end of the series is called an end
relatively ultimate.

Now, there must also be an end which is unconditionally and unlimitedly the ultimate
end of all human acts; and this we call the absolutely ultimate end. We shall discuss this end
in the next Article. We notice here that it is the ultimate end that lead to it. The intermediate
ends are subordinated the ultimate end, just as the steps of a stairway are subordinated to the
top step. And as a man who wishes to reach the top of a stairway must take many
intermediate steps before reaching the top, but would not take any of them except to reach the
top, so in series of achieving the ultimate end, but he would not try to attain any of them
except on account of the ultimate end. Thus, we repeat, the ultimate end of a series of ends
gives meaning and motive to the whole series of ends gives meaning and motive to the whole
series.
 An ultimate end is both objective and subjective. The objective ultimate end is that
thing, that object, which, in last analysis, motivates a human act. The subjective last end is
the possession of the objective end and the satisfaction or happiness that is apprehended as
belonging to the possession.

To illustrate: the politician’s last end (in the series of ends which we studied above)
is a political office with its power, prominence, and good wages. This is the objective
ultimate end. The subjective ultimate end which the agent seeks to achieve is the possession
of the office and what it will bring. In other words, the object sought is office; and the
subjective desire of the agent (the acting subject) is satisfaction in the possession of the
office.

THE ULTIMATE ENDS OF HUMAN ACTS

1. The Objective Ultimate End – the possession of which will give perfect
happiness to man by complete filling up his capacity for desire, and leaving
nothing unpossessed toward which could, by any possibility, continue to tend as
towards an end. It is that which really in itself the crowning and perfect
fulfilment of rational desire. It is the limitless good. It is God.

2. The Subjective Ultimate End – the possession of objective end and the
happiness or satisfaction that is apprehended which the agent seeks in that
possession.
HAPPINESS
Every human act acts for the sake of an end. Every human action proceeds from
potency and is directed towards an act. Thus act receives its nature from the corresponding
end of the will. Thus human actions entail a disposition toward an end.
Man strives towards his end in so far that the end is gone. Then the good must be the
end in so far as it is good.
Human activities have a good as end, and there is an ultimate end, good as end of
ends for the whole of human life. This end is intentionally present in the agent, namely:
 The notion of the ultimate end
 Self-fulfillment
 Perfection of the Agent
 The satisfaction of all desires
 Total good or Happiness
What man strives for in life is Happiness. A happy person lacks nothing that he or
she needs.
Definition of Happiness
 Happiness, objectively, means having intrinsic value and capable of satisfying a
human need.
 Happiness, subjectively, means the psychological state of feeling contented
resulting from the attainment of that which is good in itself.
e.g. The toy (objective) make the child happy (subjective.)
  Happiness, is a state of being which contribute to the perfection of a person.
 Happiness, is the state of perfection arising from the possession of what is good.

Kinds of Happiness

1. Natural – when it comes of man’s possession of that which he finds

achievable by his unaided natural powers, or which is not beyond the reach of
his nature.

 It is attainable by man through the use of his natural power alone.

2. Supernatural – when it consists in the possession of that which is of a value

surpassing all that natural powers can achieve unaided.

 It is attainable by man through his own powers aided by the infusion of

grace from God.
 It is only possible in the afterlife for “Man’s heart is restless until it
rests in God” - St. Augustine
Happiness is natural when it comes of man's possession of that which he finds
achievable by his unaided natural powers, or which is not beyond the reach of his nature.
Thus, a man's happiness in the possession of sound health is natural happiness. Happiness is
supernatural when it consists in the possession of that which is of a value surpassing all that
natural powers can achieve unaided. Thus, man's happiness in possessing the grace of God is
supernatural. Now, man tends toward the limitless good, and since this is infinite, and hence
beyond man's finite powers, -man tends toward something which is beyond the reach of
unaided nature. Man tends towards supernatural, eternal happiness. The appetite of man's
very nature is for the supernatural. Still, this tendency and appetite for the supernatural is
only indicated in Ethics. As a purely rational science, independent of divine revelation,
cannot investigate the matter of supernatural happiness, nor describe the manner in which it is
to be attained. But this science can and does show that man's tendency is to the limitless
good, the infinite good, and we know that natural powers can achieve only limited things.
Yet, to confine our study within its proper limits, we must consider the limitless good, and
happiness in its possession only in so far as this is achievable by natural powers, that is, by
the perfect natural life, by a life which fully agrees with the dictates of right reason.

Sources of True Happiness

 Not in the possession of natural goods

 Not found in honor, glory or power
 Not in pleasure
 Seeking the perfection of our highest faculty, the being is ordered for the good
of the soul.
 HUMAN HAPPINESS IS CONSISTS IN GOD ALONE
Effect of Happiness
 Possession of God (beatific vision)

Evil makes it difficult for man to attain happiness; this persists as long as we
have life. Ignorance, disordered passions and bodily pains are some.
Evaluation: EXERCISE 3

Name: _______________________________________ DATE: _____________

Course & Year: _______________________________ CAMPUS: __________

Identification. Write your answer before the number.

_________ 1. The efficient cause of an act

_________ 2. The final cause of an act.

_________ 3. The state of perfection arising from the possession of what is good.

_________4. In whom genuine happiness consists alone

_________5. The ultimate objective end of man.

_________6. Appetency found in animals

_________7. A cause without which no human act can exist.

_________ 8. Assumes the aspect of good and cannot be willed as such for its own sake.

_________ 9. An end, which is willed as a mean to a further end

_________10. Known as the tendency or potency of an act.

References:

Bulaong, O.G., Calano, M.J.T., Lagliva, A., Mariano, M.N.E., & Principe, J.D.Z. (2018).
Ethics: Foundations for Moral Valuation. Quezon City: Rex Bookstore.
Glenn, P. (2013). Ethics: A Class Manual in Moral Philosophy. USA: Literary Licensing,
LLC
Shafer-Landau, R. (2017). The Fundamentals of Ethics. USA: Oxford University Press
MODULE 4.0
THE NORMS OF HUMAN ACTS
Overview:

Human acts are directed to their true end by law, and law is applied by conscience. Hence,
law and conscience are the directives or norms of human acts. This present Chapter deals with these
matters.

Learning Objectives: At the end of the lesson the learners should be able to:

1. Discuss Law and its classifications and important classes

2. Discuss conscience and identify its different states
3. Identify the factors in forming one’s conscience.

Content:

Let us view man as a traveler standing at a point where many roads converge. The
traveler wishes to reach the City of Limitless Good. This city is the goal toward which the
traveler tends by a connatural and inevitable bent of his will. Now, the tendency of the
traveler will remain the same, even if he should choose a wrong road. In other words, man,
the traveler, will choose a road for the purpose of reaching the City of Limitless Good, even
if, as a fact, the chosen road leads away from his goal. It is obvious, then, that the traveler
needs guidance, he needs direction, lest perverse and mistaken judgment thwart his purpose
and render impossible the attainment of his goal. In a word, the traveler needs a map. More:
he requires ability to read the map, and to interpret rightly where the road seems to fork or
byways open invitingly. Now, the maps, the guiding direction, is supplied to man, the
traveler, by law, and the application of law in individual acts - the reading and interpreting of
the map at particular curves and corners is achieved by conscience. Human acts are directed
to their true end by law, and law is applied by conscience. Hence, law and conscience are
the directives or norms of human acts.
LAW
Common usages of the word Law:

Regula = rule
Mensura = norm
Imperat = commands or orders by prescribing actions

 Law (according to St. Thomas) is an ordinance of reason, promulgated for

the common good by one who has charge of society.

 A law is an ordinance for it is an active and authoritative ordering or

directing of human acts in reference to an end to be attained by them.

 A law is an ordinance of reason for it comes from a reasonable will of the

lawgiver illumined by understanding of an end necessary or useful to be
attained, toward which the law serves as a proper direction. Hence, law must
 be reasonable and this means that it must be just, honest, possible of
fulfillment, useful, permanent and duly promulgated.

 A law is promulgated, that is, made known to those bound by it and these are
called its subjects. By promulgation, a law is put in application of an
authoritative ordinance.

 A law is promulgated for the common good. This is the purpose of law. Law
is not meant to impose hardship or needless restriction upon its subjects, but
to promote their good, and hence to protect and promote true liberty among
them

 A law is promulgated in a society. This is evident from the fact that law is for
the common good, and hence supposes a commonality or community of
subjects; and a community is a society.

 A law is promulgated by one who has charge of a society. By “one” is meant

a person, whether this be a single human being or a body of men united to
form the governing power. Here we have indicated the author of the law, that
is, the lawgiver or legislator. A legislator has jurisdiction which means,
literally, “the saying of what is right.” By one has the just authority of “saying
what is right” in a community is empowered to enact and promulgate true
laws.

CLASSIFICATION OF LAWS
I. According to the Immediate Author

a. Divine – laws which come directly from God such as the Ten
Commandments.
b. Human – laws or enactments of Church or state.
Division of Human Law
 laws – Ecclesiastical Laws
 Laws of the State – Civil Laws

II. According to Their Duration

a. Temporal – all human laws which some of them give expression to

requirements of the Eternal Laws.
b. Eternal – God’s plan and providence for the universe

III. According to the Manner of Their Promulgation

a. Natural – that which directs creatures to their end in accordance with

their nature and it coincides with the Eternal Law as apprehended by
human reason.
b. Positive – laws enacted by positive act of legislator.
 IV. According as They Prescribe or Forbid An Act

a. Affirmative – laws that bind always but not at every moment

b. Negative – prohibitory laws. It binds always and at every moment.

V. According to Defect of Their Violation

a. Moral – violation of which is fault or sin

b. Penal – violation of which renders the violator liable to an established
penalty, but does not infect him.
c. Mixed – violation of which involves both fault and penalty

IMPORTANT CLASSES OF LAWS

a. Eternal Law – the divine reason and will commanding that the natural order of things
be preserved and forbidding that it be disturbed. The community of all things in the
universe is governed by divine reason. This government is law. Since divine reason is
eternal, being identified with God himself, this law is the eternal law.

The Eternal Law is God's eternal plan and providence for the universe. God,
decreeing from eternity to create the world for an end (which is Himself), eternally plans and
directs all things toward that end. Thus there is from eternity a "plan of Divine Wisdom as
director of all acts and movements”-and this is The Eternal Law. St. Augustine defines the
Eternal Law as the Divine Reason and Will commanding that the natural order of things be
preserved and forbidding that it be disturbed. The Eternal Law extends to all acts and
movements in the universe. Thus, bodies obey the tendencies of their nature and follow the
laws of cohesion, gravity, inertia, etc.; plants grow; animals follow the guidance of instinct;
the earth turns upon its axis; the heavenly spheres swing through their mighty orbits; all in
accordance with the Eternal Law, powerless to reject its influence or to disobey. Of all bodily
creation, man alone may refuse the direction of the Eternal Law in matters of free choice. For
the Eternal Law applies to all creatures and directs them in a manner consonant with their
nature; and man's nature, in its rational part, is free. As a bodily being man acts in accordance
with physical laws; so he does also in those animal and vegetal functions which are proper to
his nature but not under the control of his will. But in matters that lie under man's free control
in a word, in human acts-man may be perverse and disobedient, refusing the direction of the
Eternal Law as known to him by his reason. Thus, the Eternal Law governs all things except
human acts by necessity, that is, allowing the things governed no choice in the matter; the
same Eternal Law directs human acts by suasion.

b. Natural Law – eternal law as known to man by his reason. It is man’s participation
in the Eternal Law. All things are subject to the eternal law; it directs all things to their proper
ends. But it is, in a special way, the law which governs rational creatures. Human beings
share the divine reason by becoming aware of an order in things according to which man is to
attain his last end, his true purpose in existing. The eternal law, thus manifest to human
reason, is called the natural law. The natural law is the eternal moral law as knowable by
sound human reason without the aid of supernatural revelation.
 Fundamental Expression of Natural Law

1. As we have seen, the natural law is the eternal law as knowable by sound human
reason without the aid of supernatural revelation. The natural law becomes naturally known
(and is thus promulgated) to normal human beings as they advance from infancy to fuller and
fuller use of reason. The natural law is not, in itself, a habit in the human mind, but it tends to
become a habit. The habitual knowledge of first moral principles(summed up in: "Do good-
avoid evil") becomes a true habit in the human mind; it is a habit called by the name
synderesis.

2. The basic precept of the natural law, "Do good-avoid evil," is the root out of which
definite precepts and prohibitions grow as a person advances in awareness of things and
recognizes their good or their evil. The natural law embraces all these directives.

3. The natural law indicates and directs man's inclination to act in accordance with
reason. Hence, since all virtues accord with reason, we may say that all virtues are prescribed
by the natural law.

Characteristics of Natural Law

Universal. The natural law is one and the same for all men. Yet, in certain persons, it
may be perverted by passion, habit, or evil disposition, as, for instance, in ancient Sparta
where lies and thefts and successful trickery were not considered wrong. Now, such
exceptions only prove the rule. Such exceptions do not destroy the universality of the natural
law anymore than the prevalence of malaria among a certain people destroys the universal
understanding of what is meant by human health.

Unchangeable. The natural law is changeless in the sense that its precepts cannot be
upset or destroyed. It can change by extension, by new applications, as experience brings new
situations and circumstances. Such a change is not in the natural law itself; it is extrinsic to
the natural law; it is merely a new use of the natural law. For instance, the question may arise
as to the use of atom bombs in warfare; we may inquire whether the use of such weapons is
in conflict with the natural law. Such a question is new; it could not arise in the days when
atom bombs were entirely unknown. The question seeks to apply the unchanging natural law
in a changing world. The basic and general principles of the natural law cannot be eradicated
from human nature. St. Augustine (Conf.ii) says, "The law is written in the hearts of men;
iniquity itself does not efface it."

c. The Human Positive Law – From the precepts of the natural law, human reason
derives details of direction and order for conducting the affairs of life. Human reason
interprets or applies the natural law in particular cases. Each enactment and application of the
natural law for particular cases is a human law.

Man has an aptitude for virtue, but, since the fall, he has also a strong inclination to
inordinate pleasure and a proneness to evil. Man requires training, especially when he is
young, so that he may avoid evil. And men who are evil need to be restrained. Both helpful
training and suitable restraints must deal in some detail with human actions. Hence, to
promote the application and fulfillment of the natural law, human laws are framed.
 True human laws are rooted in the natural law, for they are derived from it, and they
seek to apply it in special situations.

Human Positive Law is law enacted by Church or State. When such a law is truly law
—that is to say, when it is just, honest, possible, useful, and duly promulgated—it derives its
binding force from the natural law, and so ultimately from the Eternal Law, from God. We
may define a human positive law as an ordinance of reason, derived from the natural
law, or making a concrete and determinate application of the natural law, promulgated
for the common good by a human agency in charge of a society. That such a law derives
from the natural law is easy to see, for the natural law requires the observance of the natural
order; and the obviously requisite order for life in society is the observance, by all members
of society, of just laws. Hence, the natural order itself requires the observance of laws. But
what of unjust laws? What of laws that contravene laws of a higher order? What of civil laws
that conflict with ecclesiastical laws?

Where there is injustice, there is no law: justice is an essential quality of true law.
Again, laws which contravene other laws of a higher order are not honest; and honesty is an
essential quality of true law, and without it the so-called law is no law at all. Finally, where
laws of Church and State clash, there is injustice on the one side or the other; and, in case of
dispute, presumption favors the higher, the supernatural community, i. e., the Church. Human
positive law, when it is truly law, binds the conscience of its subjects, for it is rooted in the
natural law, and remotely in the Eternal Law of God Himself

Purposes of Human Law

Extrinsic Common Good- a good which is distinct from the community and its
members but is some object to be achieved by a common effort.
Intrinsic Common Goods
Common Good of Order- inheres in a community as a whole, a set of relations among
parts, such as the organization of the army.

Common Good of the Many- goods that inhere in individual persons but are useful to
many through communication and communion such as faith and virtue.

Changes in Law

Human laws are made by fallible man. They are therefore subject to change as men
gain more experience and are thus enabled to frame laws that more and more consistently
serve the general welfare. Further, there may arise in a society conditions which require new
laws or alterations in existing laws.

Yet frequent or sudden changes in human laws are to be avoided. To serve its
purpose, law requires certain permanence; a change is, in itself, usually prejudicial to the
general welfare. Therefore, unless the good to be achieved by change is great enough to
warrant the upheaval occasioned by the change itself, law is not to be altered.

Human reason which puts laws into words of enactment may also express itself in
deeds. And thus customs arise to serve the common good. Customs can come to have the
force of law itself. Indeed, it is possible for custom to become so firmly and widely
established that it supplants existing statute law. For the rest, custom is regularly the standard
by which existing law is interpreted.

It may be that a law which works generally for the common welfare is found, in
certain cases, to inflict damage upon individuals. The person in charge of the society
concerned may, in such instances, excuse the individuals from observing the law. The
authoritative decree of excuse is called a dispensation from the law.

CONSCIENCE

By his rational nature (that is, by his human essence equipped with understanding and
will), a person comes early in life into possession of certain items of knowledge that
enlighten and guide him in thinking and acting. These items of knowledge amount to first
truths and first laws; we call them first principles. (a) First intellectual principles are: a
person's direct awareness that he exists; that he can think straight; that what he thinks about
cannot be what it is and, at the same time, something else. (b) First moral principles, or will-
principles (that is, laws of conduct), are drawn from the direct awareness that there is such a
thing as right and good, such a thing as wrong and evil, such a thing as obligation or duty.
And thus first moral principles are, "Do good," "Avoid evil." And, since the knowledge of
good and evil is not wholly abstract, it involves certain manifest objective instances of what
is good and what is bad. This fundamental moral equipment of a human being, achieved as a
person emerges from infancy to an age of responsible conduct, is called synderesis. Now,
first principles, intellectual or moral, are habits, that are, enduring qualities, of intellect and
will. Knowledge of first truths (that is, intellectual principles) is an intellectual habit; so is
synderesis in so far as it is knowledge; synderesis in so far as it is a habitual guide and
influence upon the will is a moral habit.

When a person reaches a reasoned conclusion about his own duty, the conclusion is a
practical judgment. This judgment is called conscience. Hence conscience is not a special
faculty; it is an act of the faculty of intellect as reason. Sometimes people confuse conscience
with synderesis, and call synderesis itself by the name conscience. This is an inaccurate use
of terms. Synderesis is a habit; conscience is an act; neither is a faculty. Reason draws upon
synderesis informing the conscience-judgment.

Definition of Conscience
 Conscience is the practical judgment of reason upon an individual act as good
and to be performed or as evil and to be avoided.
 Conscience is an act of reasoning out the right and wrong of a situation before
choosing what to do.
 Conscience is the judgment of human reason recognizing and applying the
Eternal Law in individual human acts.
 Conscience is a judgment of reason, that is, it is a reasoned conclusion; to
signify the judgment which is the conclusion of the act of reasoning.
 Conscience is a practical judgment for it has reference to something to be
done, that is, either the performance or the omission of an act.
 Conscience is a judgment upon an individual act, here and now, in these
present circumstances, to be performed or omitted. It is also a judgment upon
individual act after it has been performed or omitted, but it is always an
individual judgment upon an individual act.
 Synthesis is the starting point of the reasoning process which ends in the judgment of
the reasoning process which ends in the judgment of conscience.

STATES OF CONSCIENCE
A. Correct or True – when conscience is a judgment in accordance with fact, i.e.
when it judges as good that which is really good, and as evil that which is really
evil.

B. Erroneous – the conscience that is not true.

a. Invincibility/Inculpably Erroneous – conscience that is erroneous
without the knowledge or fault of the agent
b. Culpably Erroneous – conscience that is erroneous through the agent’s
fault.

C. Certain – when conscience is an altogether firm and assured judgment in which

the agent has no fear whatever of being in error.

D. Doubtful/Dubious – conscience that is not certain. i.e. that is hesitant, that is a

judgment in which the agent is aware of the possibility of error.
a. Speculative – if the doubt concerns the existence or applicability of a law
or moral principle.
b. Practical – if the doubt concerns the lawfulness of an individual act to be
performed or omitted.

FORMATION OF CONSCIENCE
To "form" one's conscience is to get rid of doubt and achieve certainty; it is to
make up one's mind clearly and definitely on what is required in a given individual instance;
it is to reason out the right and wrong of a given situation. Now, it is not always possible to
have absolute certitude (i. e., certitude so perfect as to exclude even the possibility of error) in
matters of conscience. But it is always possible, directly or indirectly, to achieve moral
certitude, i. e., such certitude as excludes all prudent doubt. Moral certitude is sufficient and
requisite for the guidance of the conscience- judgment when there is question of the
lawfulness or unlawfulness of an act here and now to be determined upon. One may never act
in a practical doubt, but must banish the doubt and achieve moral certitude. How is this to be
done? Either directly, by studying the act itself and its moral determinants and so gaining a
clear knowledge of its moral quality as good or evil, or, when such study is not feasible or is
found fruitless, indirectly, by applying the reflex moral principle: A doubtful law does not
bind.
To illustrate:
a.) John finds among the effects of his deceased father a valuable set of books which, on the
testimony of various receipts for payment, were bought upon the installment plan from a
publishing company which is no longer in existence. From records available to John it
appears that his father died own the publishing company one hundred dollars. John asks
himself: "May I keep the books and do nothing about the matter of payment, or must I give
one hundred dollars to pious causes so that I shall not remain in unjust possession of that
which does not belong to me?" Here is the situation, the doubt. John attempts to solve the
matter directly by investigation. He knows that his father was a strictly honest man, that he
paid his bills promptly as they fell due. Could he have paid the bill, and mislaid the receipts?
Hardly, for he was us careful to preserve receipts as to pay his bills. Could the bill have been
paid and no receipts rendered by the publishing company? Not likely, for John's father was
not the man to make continued remittances and receive no official recognition of payment.
John makes inquiries about the publishing company, and learns that it failed through
mismanagement; that much money was paid into its offices and left unaccounted for, and that
many of its outstanding dues were not received. The doubt remains. On the one hand, John
has the incomplete record which seems to indicate his father's indebtedness. On the other
hand, the character of John's father, and the fact that he never made mention of this
indebtedness, seem to indicate that the bill was paid. Evidently, then, the matter is not to be
composed by direct study and investigation. Then, and only then, is John free to apply the
reflex principle: A doubtful law does not bind. Notice that the law here is found by diligent
inquiry to be doubtful-not, indeed, in itself, but in application. Thus, John may say: "I have
made due inquiry, and my doubt remains. The law which requires me to give to every man
his due is here of doubtful application, and, in that sense, a doubtful law. Now, a doubtful law
does not bind. Hence, I am not bound to pay out one hundred dollars, but may remain in
justified possession of the books.” Thus does John banish doubt and achieve moral certitude.

b.) Jones has a valuable hunting-dog which so annoys the neighbors by baying at night that
several of them have threatened to poison it. Smith, a neighbor of Jones, is annoyed by the
dog, but has no intention whatever of killing it. Smith puts poisoned food about his stables for
the purpose of killing rats. Later, Jones finds his dog dead, accuses Smith of poisoning it, and
demands payment. In a law-suit, Smith is vindicated, but he is an altogether upright man and
wishes to do no injustice by taking advantage of a court decision. He is in a state of doubt. On
the one hand, it is altogether possible that the dog came to grief by eating the poisoned food
which he had placed for rats. On the other hand, it is quite as possible that some other
distraught neighbor directly poisoned the animal. Studying over the question brings Smith no
nearer to its solution; and, of course, it would be futile to inquire among the neighbors about
the real cause of the dog's death, since none of them offered any evidence when Smith was
under trial. The doubt remaining insoluble or invincible, it becomes permissible for Smith to
apply the reflex principle: A doubtful law does not bind, and so, with moral certitude, to
decide that he is free from obligation towards Jones. It is possible, then, to achieve moral
certitude in one of two ways:

i. by direct study and investigation which clears away doubt and gives certain
knowledge, or, this failing;
ii. by application of the reflex principle
Evaluation: EXERCISE 4

Name: _______________________________________ DATE: _____________

Course & Year: _______________________________ CAMPUS: __________

Modified TRUE or FALSE. Write TRUE if the statement is correct but if the statement is
FALSE, underline the word or group of words that makes the statement incorrect and provide
before the number the correct word or group of words to make the statement true.

_________________ 1. Moral Certitude is essential in the formation of conscience.

_________________ 2. A Human Positive Law is the eternal moral law as knowable by

sound human reason without the aid of supernatural revelation.

_________________ 3. According to St. Augustine, a law is an ordinance of reason,

promulgated for the common good by one who has charge of society. .

__________________4. Laws of the State is called Ecclesiastical Laws.

__________________5. True or Correct conscience is an altogether firm and assured

judgment in which the agent has no fear whatever of being in error.

__________________6. Natural law is universal and changeable.

__________________7. A law is promulgated for the common good..

_________________ 8. Affirmative laws are prohibitory laws.

__________________ 9. Human laws come directly from God such as the Ten
Commandments.

__________________10. Dubious conscience is a conscience that is not true

References:

Bulaong, O.G., Calano, M.J.T., Lagliva, A., Mariano, M.N.E., & Principe, J.D.Z. (2018).
Ethics: Foundations for Moral Valuation. Quezon City: Rex Bookstore.
Glenn, P. (2013). Ethics: A Class Manual in Moral Philosophy. USA: Literary Licensing,
LLC
Shafer-Landau, R. (2017). The Fundamentals of Ethics. USA: Oxford University Press.