As mentioned earlier, the absence of knowledge or the presence of the condition of ignorance is one of the excusinl1

But what would be the case for the factory Manager, how did the ignorance of factory manager didfers from the ignorance
of a child who shoots a person using a real gun which he mistakes for a toy?

This will be clarified in the following discussion on the two kinds of ignorance, which we shall call the irresponsible and real
ignorance.

When we say irresponsible ignorance, it is the kind of ignorance where we can say to an ignorant person that he/she
should have known better.

While, Real ignorance is the kind of ignorance where we cannot say to an ignorant person that he/she should have known
better. With this consideration, it becomes clear that it is only real ignorance that qualifies as an excusing condition.

So now my question is how do we determine whether someone should have known better in a given situation? This can be
answered by questioning ourselves: capability and role. Firstly, do we possess the capability to acquire the necessary
knowledge in a given situation? Secondly, is it our duty to acquire this knowledge based on our role?

Determining our capacity to know depends on various factors such as maturity, mental health, and access to relevant
information. For instance, it's unreasonable to expect a child to know the dangers of a real gun compared to a toy gun due
to their biological limitations. Similarly, an adult with a mental disability may lack the cognitive capacity to understand
certain risks.

On the other hand, our duty to know is defined by our roles in specific situation. Going back to the factory manager
example, his role necessitates knowledge about potential hazards in the workplace. Failing to fulfill this duty constitutes
negligence, and his ignorance becomes irresponsible.

Degree of difficulty or pressure- commonly the difficulties in life that forces one to perform actions that one believes to be
wrong.

In this case, the greater is the degree of difficulty or pressure, the lesser is the degree of accountability; or: the lesser is the
degree of difficulty or pressure, the greater is the degree of accountability.

For instance, a person who steals a bread to feed his starving family has lesser accountability compared to a person who
steals fortune for his amusement.

Degree of Intensity of the injury that results from a wrongful action. how serious the injury or the damage.

Here the greater is the degree of injury, the greater is the degree of accountability; or: the lesser is the degree of injury, the
lesser is the degree of accountability. For instance, stealing 20 pesos from a beggar vs stealing 2 thousands pesos from a
billionaire.

Degree of one's involvement in the case of a collective action. Measures how you participate.

Here the greater is the degree of involvement, the greater is the degree of accountability; or: the lesser is the degree of
involvement, the lesser is the degree of accountability. For instance, helping a murderer to carry out his criminal intentions
vs to the murderer himself.

Degree of one's knowledge of the wrongfulness of an action and relevant facts.Here the more knowledgeable one is about
the wrongfulness of an action and relevant facts, the more accountable one is; or the lesser knowledgeable one is about
the wrongfulness of an action and relevant facts, the lesser accountable one is.

This explains for instance why for doing the same crime, the law gives lesser degree of punishment to minor compared to
an adult.