WEEK 8 DETERMINANTS OF MORALITY

Determinants of morality
a. Object
b. Motive
c. Circumstance

Learning objectives
1. Define the determinants of morality: What are the object, motive, and circumstances of a
human act?
2. Explain the relationship between the determinants of morality: How do the object, motive,
and circumstances of an act interact to determine its morality?
3. Identify the different types of moral objects: What are the different categories of actions
that can be morally good, bad, or indifferent?
4. Analyze the moral motives of an act: How can we determine whether an act is done for a
good or bad motive?
5. Assess the moral relevance of circumstances: Which circumstances are most relevant to
the morality of an act?
6. Apply the determinants of morality to real-world cases: How can we use the determinants
of morality to make ethical judgments about complex situations?

DISCUSSION

THE DETERMINANTS OF MORALITY

The determinants of morality are the factors that determine whether an action is morally
good, bad, or indifferent. They are generally considered to be three: the object, the motive, and the
circumstances.
 1. OBJECT
The object of an action is what it directly and intentionally achieves. It is the primary
determinant of morality, because it is what makes an action intrinsically good or bad. For example,
stealing is always morally wrong, regardless of the motive or circumstances. This is because the
object of stealing is to take something that does not belong to you, which is a violation of another
person's rights.
The object of a moral act is the end or purpose of the act, or the thing that the act is intended
to achieve. It is the most important determinant of the morality of an act, because it is what gives
the act its essential character.
Some examples of moral objects include:
• Protecting human life and dignity: This includes acts such as helping the sick and injured,
defending the innocent, and promoting social justice.
• Promoting the common good: This includes acts such as working for peace and
understanding, protecting the environment, and helping the poor and marginalized.
• Living a virtuous life: This includes acts such as practicing honesty, courage, and
compassion.
Actions that are directed towards these moral objects are generally considered to be good, while
actions that are directed towards immoral objects are generally considered to be bad.
Here are some specific examples:
• Good: Stealing money from a bank is immoral because its object is to take something that
does not belong to you. Helping a neighbor in need is moral because its object is to promote
the common good.
• Bad: Killing someone in self-defense is morally permissible because its object is to protect
your own life. Killing someone for revenge is immoral because its object is to inflict harm
on another person.
It is important to note that the morality of an act can also be affected by the circumstances
in which it is performed and the intention of the person performing the act. For example, an act of
self-defense may be immoral if it is performed with excessive force or if it is motivated by hatred
or revenge.
However, the object of an act is always the primary determinant of its morality. This is
because the object of an act is what gives the act its essential character. For example, stealing
money is always wrong, regardless of the circumstances in which it is done or the intention of the
person doing it.
Different types of moral Objects
• Actions that directly affect the common good. These are actions that have a direct impact
on the well-being of others, such as helping the poor and sick, protecting the environment,
and working for peace and justice.
• Actions that directly affect human life and dignity. These are actions that have a direct
impact on the value and worth of human beings, such as respecting the rights of others,
protecting the innocent, and preserving human life.
• Actions that directly affect the development of human virtue. These are actions that help
us to become better people, such as practicing honesty, courage, and compassion.
Actions that fall into any of these categories can be morally good, bad, or indifferent, depending
on the specific circumstances in which they are performed and the intention of the person
performing the act.
Here are some exampl es:
• Actions that directly affect the common good:
o Giving money to charity
o Volunteering your time to help others
o Recycling and composting
o Voting in elections
• Actions that directly affect human life and dignity:
o Telling the truth
o Keeping promises
o Defending the innocent
o Helping the poor and sick
• Actions that directly affect the development of human virtue:
o Practicing honesty
o Practicing courage
o Practicing compassion
o Practicing forgiveness
 2. MOTIVE
Motive of an action is the reason why it is performed. It is the intention or goal of the
person acting. The motive can affect the morality of an action, but it is not as important as the
object. For example, if you steal bread to feed a starving child, your motive is good, but your action
is still wrong because the object is still stealing. However, your good motive may mitigate the
seriousness of your sin.
The motive of a moral act is the reason why the act is performed. It is the internal
disposition of the person performing the act, which determines their intention. The motive is often
difficult to know for sure, but it can be inferred from the circumstances in which the act is
performed and the other actions of the person.
The motive of an act is important because it can affect the morality of the act. For example,
an act that is performed with a good motive is generally considered to be more morally good than
an act that is performed with a bad motive.
Here are some specific examples:
• Good motive: Giving money to a beggar because you want to help them is morally
good because it is done with a good motive. Giving money to a beggar because you
want to impress your friends is morally less good because it is done with a less good
motive.
• Bad motive: Helping a neighbor in need because you want to be paid back is morally
less good than helping a neighbor in need because you want to help them. Killing
someone in self-defense because you want to protect yourself is morally permissible,
but killing someone in self-defense because you hate them is morally less good.
The motive of an act can also affect the severity of the moral wrongness of the act. For
example, stealing money from a bank is a more serious moral wrong if it is done with the motive
of greed than if it is done with the motive of desperation.
It is important to note that the motive of an act does not always determine the morality of
the act. For example, an act that is performed with a good motive may still be wrong if the act
itself is immoral. For example, killing someone who is trying to kill you is morally permissible,
even if you do so with the motive of revenge.
However, the motive of an act is still an important factor to consider when evaluating the
morality of an act. This is because the motive of an act can provide insights into the character of
the person performing the act and the reasons for their actions.
 3. CIRCUMSTANCES
Circumstances of an action are the factors that surround it and affect its morality. These
can include things like the person acting, the time and place of the action, and the consequences
of the action. Circumstances can make an otherwise good action better or worse, and they can also
make an otherwise bad action better or worse. For example, if you give P100.00 to a homeless
person, that is a good action. However, if you give P100.00 to a homeless person who is about to
die of starvation, your action is even better because of the circumstances.
In order for an action to be morally good, all three determinants must be good. If any one
of the determinants is bad, the action is also bad.

The circumstances of a moral act are the external factors that affect the morality of the act.
These factors can include the time, place, people involved, and consequences of the act.
The circumstances of an act can affect its morality in a number of ways. For example, an
act that is morally permissible in one circumstance may be morally wrong in another circumstance.
For example, killing someone in self-defense is morally permissible, but killing someone for
revenge is morally wrong.
Additionally, the circumstances of an act can affect the severity of the moral wrongness of
the act. For example, stealing money from a bank is a more serious moral wrong if it is done with
the motive of greed than if it is done with the motive of desperation.
Here are some specific examples of how circumstances can affect the morality of an act:
• Killing someone in self-defense: This act is morally permissible, but only if it is
necessary to protect your own life or the life of another person. If you can escape
the danger without killing the person attacking you, then killing them would be
morally wrong.
• Stealing: This act is always morally wrong, but the severity of the moral wrongness
can vary depending on the circumstances. For example, stealing money from a large
corporation is less morally wrong than stealing money from a poor person.
• Lying: This act is generally morally wrong, but there are some circumstances in
which it is morally permissible to lie. For example, it is morally permissible to lie
to a Nazi soldier about the whereabouts of a Jewish family.
It is important to note that the circumstances of an act do not always determine the morality
of the act. For example, an act that is performed with a good motive may still be wrong if the act
itself is immoral. For example, killing someone who is trying to kill you is morally permissible,
even if you do so with the motive of revenge.
However, the circumstances of an act are still an important factor to consider when
evaluating the morality of an act. This is because the circumstances of an act can provide insights
into the reasons for the person's actions and the consequences of their actions.
 Here are some questions that you can ask yourself to help you evaluate the morality of an
act in light of its circumstances:
• Is the act necessary to achieve a good end?
• Is the act proportionate to the good that it will achieve?
• Are there any less harmful ways to achieve the same good?
• Are there any innocent people who will be harmed by the act?
• What are the long-term consequences of the act?
By asking yourself these questions, you can better understand the moral implications of
your actions and make more informed decisions.

Here is an example of how the three determinants of morality can be used to judge the
morality of an action:
Action: Stealing bread to feed a starving child.
Object: Stealing, which is a violation of another person's rights.
Motive: To feed a starving child, which is a good motive.
Circumstances: The child is about to die of starvation, which is a serious circumstance.
Judgment: The action is morally wrong because the object is stealing. However, the good
motive and serious circumstances may mitigate the seriousness of the sin.

Kinds of circumstances on morality of human act:

a. Aggravating circumstances
Aggravating circumstances are those that make a bad act worse. They increase the moral
culpability of the person performing the act. Some examples of aggravating circumstances include:
• The use of violence
• The premeditation of the act
• The abuse of power or authority
• The commission of the act against a vulnerable person
• The causing of great harm
For example, stealing a loaf of bread to feed a starving child is less morally culpable than stealing
a million dollars to buy a luxury car. The latter act is aggravated by the amount of money stolen
and the fact that it was done for personal gain.
b. Mitigating circumstances
Mitigating circumstances are those that make a bad act less bad. They decrease the moral
culpability of the person performing the act. Some examples of mitigating circumstances include:
• The lack of premeditation
• The acting under duress or coercion
• The commission of the act in a moment of weakness or passion
• The causing of minimal harm
For example, stealing a loaf of bread to feed a starving child is less morally culpable than stealing
a loaf of bread because you are feeling hungry. The latter act is mitigated by the fact that you are
acting in a moment of weakness.

c. Justifying circumstances
Justifying circumstances are those that make a bad act morally good. They are very rare, but they
can exist. For example, it is morally wrong to kill another person, but it is justified to kill someone
in self-defense.

d. Excusing circumstances
Excusing circumstances are those that remove a person's moral responsibility for their actions.
They make an act morally involuntary. Some examples of excusing circumstances include:
• Mental illness
• Intoxication
• Minority age
• Ignorance
For example, a person who is mentally ill and does not understand the consequences of their
actions cannot be held morally responsible for those actions.

CONCLUSION
In conclusion, the determinants of morality play a crucial role in evaluating the moral
character of human actions. These determinants are the object, motive, and circumstances. The
object, as the primary determinant, defines the intrinsic morality of an action, while the motive
and circumstances can further affect its moral evaluation.
The object of an action directly determines whether it is morally good or bad, as it reflects
the intention and goal of the act. Examples of moral objects include actions that promote the
common good, human life and dignity, and the development of human virtue. The object is the
most significant factor in determining the morality of an act.
The motive, or the reason behind an action, can influence its moral evaluation. While a
good motive can mitigate the moral wrongness of an act, it does not necessarily make an inherently
bad act morally good. The circumstances surrounding the act can also affect its moral assessment.
They may turn an otherwise morally permissible act into a morally wrong one, or vice versa,
depending on factors like necessity, proportionality, and harm to others.
Aggravating circumstances make a bad act worse, increasing moral culpability. Mitigating
circumstances reduce moral culpability, making a bad act less severe. Justifying circumstances can
make a bad act morally good, though they are rare. Excusing circumstances remove moral
responsibility due to factors like mental illness or ignorance.
The interplay of these determinants allows for a nuanced understanding of the morality of
human actions, taking into account both the nature of the act and the intentions and consequences
surrounding it.

SOURCES
Agapay, Ramon B. Ethics and Filipino: A Manual on Morals for Students and Educators. Manila:
Glen, Paul J. Ethics, London: Herder Book Company, 1965.
Google and Youtube
Old notes/handouts Ethics