PRINCIPLES FOR THE MORAL JUDGMENT OF THE HUMAN ACT

SOURCES OF THE MORALITY OF HUMAN ACTS

◦OBJECT

◦ INTENTION

◦CIRCUMSTANCES

OBJECT

Each voluntary act has a particular object or content that is known and willed by the person who acts

The object of the act is that towards which the act tends as carried out by a human being.

The object can be considered:◦ Physical dimension◦ Moral dimension

OBJECT

It can happen that actions may have the same physical object but different moral objects:

◦ I can speak: to tell a lie, to spread a calumny, to praise someone

◦ A person may kill another: in self-defense, to carry out a death penalty, to assassinate

◦ To take something that belongs to another: act of theft or simply borrowing

OBJECT

It can happen that actions may have the same physical object but different moral objects:

◦ I can speak: to tell a lie, to spread a calumny, to praise someone

◦ A person may kill another: in self-defense, to carry out a death penalty, to assassinate

◦ To take something that belongs to another: act of theft or simply borrowing

OBJECT

Its morality (moral object) will depend on how the act contributes to the true good of the person, if it conforms to the natural moral law.

The moral object of the act is intrinsic to it.

Intrinsically evil acts: acts opposed to the true good of the person

the moral object goes against the natural moral law and hence the dignity of the person

INTENTION OR END

The end of the moral act is the objective towards which the person directs his act, that is, what he aims at achieving. (finis operantis)

This end, together with the moral object, determines the substance of the moral act.

The end is the main intention of the agent, without which the act would not be carried out.

INTENTION OR END

The end underlines the subjective element of he moral act.

The aim is the intention that the subject has while carrying out an act; this intention may or may not coincide with the object of the act.

Examples:

◦ Both the object and the end coincide◦ The object does not coincide with the end

INTENTION OR END

DOES NOT COINCIDE: a given type of behaviour may be desired for different reasons

A person gives a gift or present (object of the act)??? (end)

COINCIDE

A person gives a gift or present (object of the act)??? (end)

CIRCUMSTANCES

Different factors or accidental aspects of the object or the intention of the subject which affect the goodness of the action in some way

To rob a lot or to rob little does not constitute two different types of robbery; but rather two different degrees of gravity

CIRCUMSTANCES

Qualities of the person who acts

Quality and quantity of the object involved in the act

Place where the act is carried out

Means employed

Way of acting

CIRCUMSTANCES

Amount and quality of time involved

Reason for the act – secondary motives

Consequences of the action

Principles for evaluating the morality of an action

The moral object gives the act its own intrinsic and essential moral value.

◦ If the act has a bad moral object, it will necessarily be evil , independently of the intention of the person.

The action that has a morally good object also needs an upright intention in order to be really good. The end has to be good.

◦ Evil can never be done to obtain something good.◦ The end does not justify the means.

The circumstances can increase or decrease the goodness or badness of an act:

They can make a good act become bad: the circumstances modify the moral value of the object

EXAMPLE 1

A manager has to travel on company business. He isentitled to stay in a first class hotel at an estimated cost of Shs10,000 per day.

He stays in a cheaper hotel at a cost of Shs2,500 per day but claims from his company the cost of the

more expensive hotel by falsely stating that he has stayed in it.

EXAMPLE 2

The conditions of service of a firm provide for reimbursement of medical bills of employees and certain members of their families up to a certain limit, dependent on each employee’s annual salary.

A manager is in the habit of obtaining false medical bills from a doctor and a pharmacist whom she knows in order to ensure that she exhausts her “medical entitlement” every year.

EXAMPLE 3

“The Dutch parliament demanded today that the immigration minister reconsider her decision to strip a Somali-born lawmaker of her passport for falsifying her asylum claim, or else grant her citizenship anew.

Ms. Ayaan Hirsi Ali said she was resigning yesterday after Immigration Minister Rita Verdonk, a member of her own VVD liberal party, told her she might lose her Dutch passport because she lied on her asylum application.

Ms Hirsi Ali, who has drawn death threats for her fight for the rights of Muslim women, admitted using a false name and date of birth when she arrived in 1992 to stop her family finding her after she fled an arranged marriage with a cousin in Canada.

However, she said that had been public knowledge when the VVD chose her as a candidate in 2002 and said she would appeal.”

(“Parliament demands Hirsi keeps Passport”, Daily Nation, May 18, 2006).

Evaluate the morality of what Hirsi did in 1992. Your answer should be based on the analysis of the object, intention and circumstances of her actions. You may include your own assumptions which you think are relevant in giving your answer, and which are not given in the newspaper article.

Alice has been working as an accountant in the National Telephone Company. She wants to enroll in a post-graduate course to upgrade her qualifications. She knows that with her current salary she will not be in a position to pay the fees which is due at the end of the month.

Alice knows that many of her colleagues have not been working during office hours and have been completing their tasks after office hours especially on weekends; by doing so, they manage to claim for overtime pay and receive extra income at the end of the month.

As she was badly in need of money for her studies, Alice also worked overtime even when there was no need for her to do so. In this way she managed to raise the money she needed for her fees and enrolled for the post-graduate course.

  Evaluate the morality of Alice’s action. If you were Alice, what

would you have done and why?

James works as a banker in Continental Bank. He was given a computer and a printer at his work station for purposes of his work.

  James is also an active member of his Parish Council. He

has been in the habit of using his printer in the office to print posters for the different activities of the Parish in order to save money for the parish.

  Evaluate the morality of James’ action. If you were in

James’ position what would you do and why? (10 marks) 

04/20/23

Case: Acceptance of gifts

John was recently appointed as the Division Head of the IT department of a private university.

His department receives an annual budget of Shs4million for

the maintenance and upgrading of the equipment.

During the Christmas holidays John received some gift certificates from one of the university’s suppliers, Access Computers.

These certificates would enable him to shop and choose any

electronic gadget as a gift token.

John accepted the certificates and chose a digital camera for

himself.

04/20/23

Evaluate the morality of John’s actions.

If you were John, what would you do and why?

Case: Acceptance of gifts

Who owns gifts given to employees? Daily Nation, 24 August 2007.

“They say life is never fair to everyone and that some people are luckier than others. But what happens when someone, in this case, the company you work for, wants to share in your luck?

These days there are many handouts that come with attending functions, and numerous product promotions at which employees get gifts or win some goodies while acting on the behalf of the company.

Case: Acceptance of gifts

Most companies insist on keeping the gifts and goods won, something that does not sit well with the employees.

One case is that of a managing director of a renowned firm.

As he was browsing through the newspaper one morning, he was surprised to see a picture of one of his sales representatives receiving keys to a new pick-up he won in a promotion by a local telecommunication company.

The MD was not amused to see his junior take all the glory. He argued that the company bought airtime for the sales people, and that were it not for the company’s resources, the employee would not have won the pick-up.

However, the salesman reasoned that it was he who entered the promotion and followed all the rules to the point of winning the pick-up, which was rightfully his.”

What the right of an employee is regarding any advantages that may come their way due to the nature of their job is a question many workers dread asking the employer for fear of being told that they have no rights over such gifts.

They end up sneaking the gifts home, sending a relative to pick the gift for them, or even secretly telling the source of drop the gifts for them at their homes.”

Evaluate the morality of the salesman’s action. If you were the salesman, how would you have acted and why?