Ethical Theories

Ethics affects how moral acts are made. Every time we make a moral judgment, we rely on ethical
norms—these are standards that serve as references for evaluating what is right or wrong.
However, standards vary. Why? Because different ethical theories place emphasis on different
perspectives or principles. That’s why moral evaluations may differ from one person or culture to another.
To assess moral actions, we use rubrics or criteria. These function like checklists or guidelines that help
us determine whether a given action is ethical. The way we judge these actions is influenced by the ethical
perspective or theory we adopt.

Deontological Ethics (Duty-Based Ethics)

Deontology comes from the Greek word "deon", meaning duty. In this ethical theory, what is right or wrong
is based on whether you are fulfilling a duty, not on the outcome of your actions.
This theory is best known through the work of Immanuel Kant, an 18th-century German philosopher.

Key Principles of Deontology: Weaknesses of Deontology:

 It uses rules to distinguish right from Sometimes following rules can produce
wrong. undesirable or harmful consequences.
 Actions are morally right if they align with Example:
certain duties or obligations, regardless
You are a software engineer and you discover a
of the consequences.
missile is about to be launched, potentially
 It avoids subjectivity by focusing on clear- starting a war. You can hack the system to stop it
cut moral rules. —but doing so violates your professional code of
ethics (which prohibits unauthorized system
 It appeals to our moral intuition—we
access).
often feel that some actions are just
inherently right or wrong. Deontology tells you not to hack, because it’s
against your duty. But by following the rule,
For example:
thousands of lives may be lost. This is where
 Don’t lie deontology can seem too rigid and disconnected
from real-world outcomes.
 Don’t steal
 Don’t cheat
Common Deontological Systems:
Following such rules makes ethical decision-
making clear and consistent. 1. Judeo-Christian Ethics:
o Based on religious commandments
like the Ten Commandments.
Strengths of Deontology:
o Duties are often laid out clearly
 It is easy to apply: follow the rules, do (e.g., “Thou shalt not kill”).
your duty.
o Actions rooted in love are seen as
 Provides moral clarity: if your action moral; actions that violate love and
follows the rule, it is moral. duty are immoral.
 Promotes consistency: people who act 2. Judaism:
out of duty make predictable, principled
decisions. o Has many detailed laws and
obligations that must be followed.
 o It is difficult but seen as a divine “Act only according to that maxim whereby you
duty. can at the same time will that it should become a
universal law.”
3. Christianity:
Translation: Before acting, ask yourself:
o Emphasizes love as a moral
foundation.  Can I imagine a world where everyone
does this?
o Anything that goes against love
(e.g., hate, deceit) is considered  Would that world make sense and be
immoral. acceptable?

4. Kantian Ethics (a secular version): Example:

o Based on human intellect and You forget your wallet and want to steal a snack.
reason. You ask yourself:

o Kant argued that morality does not  What if everyone stole when they forgot
need to come from God. their wallet?

o We use our rational minds to  The system would break down—shops

figure out what is morally right. would close, and trust would vanish.
 Therefore, stealing is not
universalizable → it’s immoral.
Kantian Ethics: Reason as the Basis of
Morality This principle ensures you don’t make
exceptions for yourself.
Kant’s bold claim: We can build a moral system
without depending on God—based solely on
reason and logic. Second Formulation: Respect for Persons
Morality, to Kant, is like math: it is universal, “Act in such a way that you treat humanity…
objective, and applies to everyone equally— always at the same time as an end, never merely
regardless of religion or beliefs. as a means.”
This means you must respect the dignity of
Categorical Imperative: The Core of Kant’s every person. Don’t use others for your own
Morality gain.

Kant introduced the Categorical Imperative—a

clear, absolute command that tells us what we Criticisms of Kantian Ethics:
must do morally, no matter our desires.
While it promotes fairness and consistency, it can
This is different from a hypothetical imperative, sometimes produce counterintuitive results.
which is a conditional rule (e.g., If you want a
good grade, study). Example:

Categorical imperatives are moral laws: A killer comes to your door looking for your friend.
You want to lie to protect your friend.
 They apply to everyone, in all situations.
Kant says: Lying is always wrong—even to a
 They are not based on consequences. murderer.
 They are derived from reason, not Why? Because lying cannot be universalized. If
emotion, religion, or cultural customs. everyone lied, trust would collapse.
Even if the truth leads to harm, lying is still
First Formulation: The Principle of immoral in Kant’s view.
Universalizability

Why It’s Deontological:

  Moral obligations come from the mind
and reason, not from divine command.
Real-World Applications:
 You are obliged to follow your duties
based on what your intellect says is right.  International Law: Tries to avoid religious
bias and instead relies on reasoned,
 The rules are clear: if you follow your duty, universal principles—very Kantian in spirit.
your action is moral.
 Professional Ethics: Like codes of
 Failure to follow your duty, whether by conduct for doctors, engineers, lawyers—
commission (doing something wrong) or rules you must follow, no matter what.
omission (failing to do the right thing), is
immoral.

Consequentialist Ethics
Consequentialism is an ethical theory that determines whether an action is right or wrong based entirely
on its outcomes or consequences. In other words, the morality of an action depends on the result it
produces, not on the action itself, the intentions behind it, or whether it follows a set of rules or duties.
 If the outcome is good, then the action is considered morally right.
 If the outcome is bad or harmful, then the action is morally wrong.
 Key question: "Does this action lead to a beneficial result?"
Focus on Results action is seen as successful and therefore morally
acceptable.
Consequentialist theories do not care about
whether you fulfilled a duty, followed rules, or
acted with good intentions. What matters is what
happened as a result of your action. Utilitarianism: The Most Famous Type of
For example: Consequentialism

 You might have lied, broken the law, or What is Utilitarianism?

ignored tradition—but if your action led to Utilitarianism is a specific branch of
a good outcome (especially for you), then consequentialism that focuses on maximizing
it could still be seen as morally happiness or utility.
acceptable.
 The word “utility” means usefulness, or
This means consequentialists are outcome- in ethics, the capacity to produce
oriented, and sometimes even believe that benefit, pleasure, or happiness.
breaking rules is acceptable if it leads to a
better result. This raises the classic ethical  Utilitarianism aims to promote actions that
question: increase overall well-being and reduce
suffering.
"Do the ends justify the means?"
Founders and Key Thinkers
Two of the most influential philosophers who
Example: Real-World Scenario developed utilitarian thought are:
Imagine you’re required to sell a product and Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832)
meet a 2 million peso sales quota within 3
months. Under consequentialist thinking, how you  Considered the founder of modern
achieve that goal—through hard work, utilitarianism.
persuasion, manipulation, or even dishonest  He defined happiness as pleasure
means—is less important than the fact that you without pain.
achieved it.
If the goal is met and your company benefits, the
  According to him, an ethical action is one  For example: Even if no one is around and
that produces the greatest amount of no one gets hurt, speeding at 2 AM should
pleasure and the least amount of pain. still be considered wrong because
speeding laws exist to protect lives in
 He even developed a system called the
general.
“felicific calculus”, a type of moral
calculator meant to measure and compare This approach allows for the creation of
the amount of pleasure or pain that consistent laws and social norms, even when
different actions would produce. the consequences in individual cases might seem
harmless.
Felicific Calculus Criteria Included:
 Intensity (How strong is the pleasure or
pain?) Consequentialism in Government and Society
 Duration (How long will it last?) Many government programs, especially those
aiming to reduce poverty or improve the lives of
 Certainty (How likely is it to happen?)
many people, are based on consequentialist
 Propinquity (How soon will it occur?) reasoning.

 Fecundity (Will it lead to more pleasures?) Example: 4Ps (Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino
Program)
 Purity (How free is it from pain?)
 The 4Ps is a conditional cash transfer
 Extent (How many people will be program that gives financial support to
affected?) poor Filipino families, provided they meet
Bentham’s utilitarianism is known as act certain conditions (e.g., children attending
utilitarianism. school, regular health checkups).

Act Utilitarianism (Bentham)  From a consequentialist perspective, this

is moral because the outcome is
 Judges each individual action based on improved well-being for millions of people,
whether it produces more pleasure than even if the program has some
pain. inefficiencies.
 Every time you face a decision, you
should evaluate its consequences.
Criticisms of Consequentialism
 Each action is considered on a case-by-
case basis. 1. Conflict of Interests
 A major problem with consequentialism is
that what is good for one person may
John Stuart Mill (1806–1873) be bad for another.
 A student and critic of Bentham.  For example: If you take a job away from
someone else to benefit yourself, it may
 Mill believed Bentham’s approach was too
be good for you but harmful to them.
simplistic and impractical.
 This can lead to moral confusion and
 He argued that society cannot function
conflict, especially when deciding who
properly if people are constantly
deserves to benefit more.
evaluating the morality of every small
action individually. 2. Measuring Happiness and Harm
Rule Utilitarianism (Mill)  How do we measure happiness, pleasure,
or pain?
 Instead of evaluating each individual act,
Mill proposed that we should follow rules  Is it better to donate money to a charity
that have been shown to generally now, or use that money for medical school
promote the greatest happiness for the to save lives later?
greatest number over time.
  These value comparisons are complex o Is it okay to lie to someone if it
and often subjective. makes them feel better?
3. Ends Justifying the Means o Is it acceptable to harm a few
people if it helps many others?
 Consequentialism is often criticized for
promoting the idea that you can do  This can lead to justifying unethical
something wrong as long as the result actions under the belief that the result is
is good. good.
 For example:

Virtue Ethics
Virtue Ethics is a moral philosophy proposed by Aristotle, one of the most influential Greek philosophers.
Unlike other ethical theories that focus on rules (like Deontology) or consequences (like Consequentialism),
Virtue Ethics focuses on the moral character of the person performing the action.
Key question: “What kind of person should I be?” rather than “What should I do?”

Core Idea: Living Up to One's Purpose  It reflects virtues such as courage,

wisdom, honesty, generosity, etc.
Virtue Ethics starts with a very personal and
philosophical question: Conversely, an action is bad if it comes from
vices, such as cowardice, ignorance, greed, or
“How can I become the person I am meant to
laziness, which pull you away from your higher
be?”
purpose.
Before answering this, Aristotle believed you first
need to ask:
How Do You Become Virtuous?
“What is the reason for my existence?”
“What is my ultimate purpose as a human Aristotle believed that virtue is not innate—
being?” you’re not born good or bad. Instead:
According to Aristotle, the purpose of human life  Virtue is developed through repetition
is to achieve happiness, or eudaimonia (a and habit.
Greek word often translated as flourishing,
fulfillment, or a life well-lived). Everything we do—  Just like learning an instrument or sport,
studying, working, forming relationships—is you become virtuous by practicing
ultimately aimed at making us happy. virtuous behavior over and over again
until it becomes part of who you are.
But here’s the twist:
“We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence,
Happiness, in the Aristotelian sense, is not just then, is not an act but a habit.” – Aristotle
pleasure or comfort, but living a life of virtue
and purpose.
The Golden Mean: Finding Balance

What Makes an Action Good? A central idea in Aristotle’s Virtue Ethics is the
Golden Mean. This refers to the midpoint
In Virtue Ethics, an action is considered morally between two extremes: deficiency and excess.
good if:
Each virtue lies between two vices:
 It helps you become a better version of
yourself, Deficiency Virtue Excess

 It is in accordance with your purpose as a Arrogance Modesty Shyness

human being, and
Cowardice Courage Recklessness
Deficiency Virtue Excess best version of ourselves—virtuous, wise,
balanced, and deeply fulfilled.
Thus:
Stinginess Generosity Wastefulness
 What is good? That which helps us fulfill
Example: our purpose and reach eudaimonia.
If you’re too boastful, you’re arrogant.
 What is bad? That which leads us away
If you always downplay your abilities, you're
from it.
insecure.
The middle ground is modesty, which is
virtuous.
Virtue is a Lifelong Project
Moral action, then, is always about balance—not
too much and not too little. Aristotle didn’t see virtue as something you
achieve once and keep forever.
Instead, becoming virtuous is a lifelong
journey. Your character continues to develop
Applying Virtue Ethics in Real Life
through your choices and habits.
Aristotle recognized that choosing the middle
Virtue Ethics teaches that:
ground isn't always easy. It requires wisdom,
reflection, and self-awareness.  We must constantly work on ourselves.
Example: Studying and Future Goals  Virtue should guide how we act, think,
and feel.
Let’s say you’re a student:
 It’s not just about doing the right thing—it’s
 Studying every day might feel
about becoming the kind of person who
inconvenient or tiring now.
naturally sees and does the right thing.
 But if you build a habit of discipline, you
gain knowledge and graduate with a
degree. Moral Clarity and Enlightenment
 That degree increases your chances of To be moral is to choose balance in every
getting a job. decision.
 With a job, you earn money. Enlightenment, in this view, is the ability to see
clearly what is right and to do it willingly.
 With money, you gain comfort and
possibly happiness. As Aristotle said:
“Kapag alam mo ang tama, gagawin mo ang
But then what? tama.”
Even with money, some people still feel empty (When you know what is right, you will do what is
or unfulfilled. You may get married, start a family right.)
—and that might give you a new purpose.
But here's a problem:
So Aristotle would ask: Are you living according
to your ultimate purpose?
And for him, that purpose is not wealth, not Criticism: Knowing vs. Doing
status, but real happiness—flourishing
through virtue. Virtue Ethics faces a major challenge:
Knowing what is good doesn’t guarantee that
you’ll do it.
Why Do We Exist?
For example:
According to Virtue Ethics:
We exist to be happy. But not in a shallow  You may know it's wrong to cheat on a
way. test, but you still might do it because of
We exist to fulfill our purpose by becoming the pressure or fear.
  There is a gap between knowledge and  Doing the right thing might lead to being
action. bullied, judged, or left out.
This is especially true in real-life contexts, like in  Meanwhile, people who cheat, manipulate,
the Philippines: or act immorally sometimes seem to get
ahead.
Filipino culture sometimes rewards bad
behavior and punishes good behavior, making Despite this, Virtue Ethics challenges you to be
it harder to live virtuously. good anyway, not because it's rewarded, but
because it's the right thing and your purpose
This makes being good even harder, because:
as a human being.

Care-Based Ethics
Care-Based Ethics is a feminist philosophical perspective that emphasizes relationships, emotional
connections, and the context of moral situations rather than abstract rules or consequences. It focuses
on the value of caring in ethical decision-making.
Core Ideas
 Rooted in Feminism:
This theory emerged from feminist movements as a critique of traditional moral theories (like
utilitarianism or deontology), which were seen as too focused on logic, justice, and rules. Feminist
ethicists argued that morality should also consider feelings, relationships, and care, especially
because these are often central in the lives of women.
 Relational and Context-Bound:
Unlike rule-based approaches, Care Ethics doesn't apply the same rule to every situation. Instead, it
considers the specific context and the relationship between the people involved. Every
decision is personal and depends on who is affected and how.
 Caring as a Universal Human Attribute:
Care is something innate and universal. Regardless of culture, time period, or status, people
across the world have always shown care — for children, family, friends, neighbors, and even
strangers. Because of this, Care Ethics avoids moral relativism (the idea that right and wrong vary
too much by culture).
The impulse to care is natural, and that impulse is the foundation of morality.

Caring Relationships o You care for your sick sibling not

because there’s a rule telling you
 In this ethical framework, the one-caring
to, but because you love them and
(the person showing care) must consider:
want them to be okay.
o The needs of the person being
o You help a struggling classmate
cared for
not because it benefits you, but
o The perspective of the cared-for because you understand their
difficulty and want to help.
o The expectations placed on the
one-caring in that relationship
 The goal is to respond in a way that Moral Actions in Care Ethics
promotes the well-being of the cared-for
 What is moral or right is anything that
person.
shows care, concern, and compassion
 Examples: for others.
  When someone truly cares, they are not o This theory focuses heavily on the
thinking about rules or future outcomes — welfare of the person you care for.
they are acting out of genuine concern. But what if caring for that person
harms others?
 A moral act in this framework is not about
following laws or maximizing  Example: A government
happiness, but about responding to official gives special favors
others with care. to their relative. This may
show care for their family
Immoral (Evil) Actions
but is unjust to the public.
 Actions that fail to show care or concern
2. Moral Dilemmas:
are considered immoral.
o What if you care about two people
o Example: Stealing from someone
with conflicting interests? Care
is not just illegal, it’s immoral
Ethics doesn't always provide clear
because it shows a lack of
answers.
concern for their well-being.
 Even good intentions, if done without
care, may not be moral in this view. Family-Oriented Culture Critique
 In the Filipino context, we see the value of
caring deeply in our culture — especially
A Warning: Too Much Concern
in family relationships.
 While caring is good, too much concern
 However, there’s a dark side to being too
can also lead to problems.
family-oriented:
o Example: Being overprotective can
o Some Filipinos prioritize family
hurt someone’s independence.
loyalty over public interest, which
o Giving too much to one person can lead to corruption.
might cause you to neglect others.
o Political dynasties are a product
of this — families protect each
other’s power and wealth, often at
Limitations of Care Ethics the expense of the common good.
1. Biased Perspective: o In this case, caring too much for
family becomes harmful to society.

Rights-Based Theories
Rights-Based Ethics is a moral theory that emphasizes the importance of individual rights in determining
what is right or wrong. According to this view, an action is moral if it respects the rights of others — and
immoral if it violates them.

Types of Rights o They are not created by the

government but are inherent,
There are several kinds of rights that guide this
universal, and inalienable.
theory:
o Example: Right to life, liberty, and
1. Natural Rights
the pursuit of happiness.
o These are rights that people are
2. Moral Rights
believed to have just by being
human. o These are rights grounded in
moral reasoning or ethical
principles.
 o Even if they’re not written into law, A key challenge with Rights-Based Ethics is when
they are considered morally two people’s rights come into conflict.
important.
Example (Philippines): Lina Law
o Example: The right to be treated
 The Lina Law protects the rights of
with dignity and respect.
informal settlers (squatters) by
3. Legal Rights preventing landowners from evicting them
unless there is a relocation site available.
o These are rights that are written
and enforced by laws and  Conflict:
institutions in a particular society.
o The landowner has the right to
o Example: The right to vote, the own and use their property.
right to own land, the right to a fair
o The squatters have the right to
trial.
shelter and human dignity.
In such situations, both parties have valid rights
Core Principle — so the problem becomes: Whose right takes
priority?
If your action violates someone’s rights, then
your action is not moral.
Rights serve as boundaries — they protect Resolving Conflicting Rights
individual freedoms and entitlements. A moral
"Your right ends when the right of another
person must respect and uphold the rights of
person begins."
others, even if it means giving up personal gain
or convenience.  This means your freedom is limited by
other people’s rights.
 Example: You have the right to free
Fundamental Rights
speech, but not the right to spread lies that
Some common examples of basic human rights harm another person’s reputation.
include:
When rights conflict, ethical decision-making must
 Right to Life involve:

o Everyone has a right to live. Taking  Negotiation or compromise

someone’s life (e.g., through  Weighing the impact of both rights
murder) is a serious moral
violation.  Considering which right is more
fundamental or urgent
 Right to Liberty
o Everyone has a right to freedom —
including freedom of thought, Ethical Behavior in Rights-Based Theories
movement, speech, and belief.
 Moral actions are those that uphold
 Right to Property and respect the rights of individuals.
o Individuals have a right to own,  Immoral actions are those that ignore,
use, and protect their possessions. violate, or infringe upon the rights of
others.
Ethics is not just about intentions or outcomes —
Conflict of Rights it is about whether or not people’s rights are
protected.

Casuistry (Case-Based Ethics)

Casuistry comes from the Latin word casus, meaning “case.” It is an approach in ethics that focuses on
analyzing specific cases, especially those involving moral dilemmas, by comparing them to previous
well-understood cases.
This method is commonly used in medicine, law, and bioethics.

 Case-based reasoning 2. Emergency Use Authorization (EUA)

o Ethical decisions are made by  During the COVID-19 pandemic,
looking at previous similar cases unapproved drugs or vaccines were used
and drawing analogies from them. to prevent serious illness.

o This method does not rely purely  The question:

on abstract theories but rather on
o Is it ethical to allow unapproved
real-life examples.
medical treatments in emergencies
 Rigorous Process if it might save lives?

o All angles and consequences of 3. Medical Screenings for Birth Defects

a case are considered.
 Tests like:
o Professionals analyze the situation
o Fetal Nuchal Translucency (NT)
step-by-step, examining previous
cases, possible outcomes, and o Pregnancy-Associated Plasma
unintended consequences. Protein-A (PAPP-A)
 Paradigm Cases o Human Chorionic Gonadotropin
(hCG)
o These are clear-cut cases that
serve as models or reference  These are used to check for potential
points. genetic birth defects like Down
Syndrome.
o New or complex cases are
compared to these to guide  Ethical dilemma:
decision-making.
o Should parents be informed of
possible defects?
Example Scenarios in Casuistry o What if the test results cause
emotional distress or lead to
1. Terminally Ill Patients
selective abortion?
 Example: The case of Karen Quinlan
4. Confidentiality vs. Public Welfare
o A woman in a persistent vegetative
 Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs)
state; her family requested to
may protect private information.
remove life support.
 But what if keeping silent harms public
o This became a paradigm case for
safety?
decisions about end-of-life care
and withdrawal of life support.  Casuistry weighs:
o It raised questions like: o Professional codes of ethics
(e.g., client confidentiality)
 Is it ethical to end life
support? o Public welfare and safety
 Who gets to decide?
 What if the patient didn’t How It Works
leave any written
instructions? 1. Identify the moral dilemma.
 o Example: Should a doctor remove
life support?
Strengths of Casuistry
2. Compare the current case with
previous cases.  Practical and grounded in real situations.

o Look at similar cases like Karen  Flexible and context-based.

Quinlan or other precedents.  Avoids over-reliance on abstract theories.
3. Analyze consequences and context.
o What could happen if we do or Limitations
don’t act? What are the unintended
outcomes?  May lack consistency if not guided by
strong moral principles.
4. Use moral principles, but grounded in
real-life cases.  Risk of bias or favoritism in selecting
"model cases."
o Combine rules and real
experiences to make the best  Can be hard to resolve completely new or
possible decision. unique cases with no clear precedents.

Specific Determinants of Morality

These are used to evaluate whether a particular action is morally good or bad. The focus is on
specific acts, not general ideas.
1. Intention of the Agent (Deontological 2. Nature of the Act
Perspective)
What it means:
What it means: This looks at the actual action done. Is the act
The intention refers to the purpose, reason, or itself good, evil, or neutral? The action must not
motive behind an action. Even if the outcome is be wrong or evil in itself, no matter the goal.
good, if the reason behind doing the act is wrong,
Why it matters:
the act is not fully moral.
You can't do something bad to achieve something
Why it matters: good. The "end does not justify the means" in
Morality isn't just about what you do—it’s also moral thinking.
about why you do it. If someone helps others just
Example:
to look good or gain praise, the moral value of
that help is lessened.  Wrong: Killing one person to harvest their
organs and save five lives.
Example:
o The goal (saving lives) is good.
 A student gives food to a poor classmate.
o If the student does it because they o But the action (murder) is evil in
genuinely care, that’s moral. itself.

o If the student does it to go viral on  Right: Donating blood voluntarily to save

others.
social media, the intention is
selfish—even if the act helped o Both the goal and the action are
someone. good.
Key Point: Key Point:
The moral quality of an act begins with A morally good intention is not enough. The
intention. A good act done with a bad intention is action itself must also be morally acceptable.
morally questionable.
3. Result or Outcome (Consequentialist These people are expected to uphold high moral
Perspective) standards. When they commit wrong, the gravity
is heavier.
What it means:
This focuses on the effect of the action. Even
with a good intention and an acceptable act, if the
outcome is harmful, it affects the morality of the b. Mitigating Circumstances
whole act. Lessen the seriousness of the act due to
Why it matters: pressure, provocation, or lack of intent.
In some cases, a good act might lead to negative Examples:
consequences, and this needs to be weighed.
Likewise, some actions are praised because they  A person steals because they’re starving.
bring good to many people.
 Someone punches another person after
Example: being insulted harshly.

 A nurse gives the wrong medicine by Still wrong—but somewhat understandable.

accident, leading to a patient’s death.
o The intention was to help.
c. Justifying Circumstances
o The act (administering medicine)
Make the act acceptable under the condition that
was acceptable. it's the right response to a situation.
o But the outcome was tragic. Examples:
 A student shares notes with a struggling  Self-defense:
classmate, helping them pass.
o A person defends themselves from
o The outcome is positive and an attacker.
supports the good act.
o Must happen during the actual
Key Point: moment of danger (not after).
Morality includes evaluating whether the
consequences of the action led to a good or o The threat must be real and
harmful result. immediate.

4. Circumstances d. Exempting Circumstances

What it means: The person is not morally accountable due to
This refers to the context or situation in which lack of freedom or understanding.
the act was done. Circumstances can change
Examples:
how serious the act is, whether it becomes worse,
forgivable, or even excusable.  Mentally ill (baliw) person doing
something wrong without awareness.
 Child (underage) breaking something
a. Aggravating Circumstances
without knowing consequences.
Make the act worse or more serious.
No guilt is assigned because they lack full reason
Examples: or control.

 A public official stealing public funds.

 A teacher exploiting students. To say an act is moral, you need to consider all
four:
 A robbery with violence or rape.
 Is the intention good?
 Is the action morally acceptable?
 Are the results beneficial? If any of these fail badly (ex: bad intent, evil act),
the morality of the action is compromised.
 What are the circumstances?