The Modifiers of Human Act

The modifiers of human acts refer to factors that can influence essential qualities such as knowledge, freedom, and
voluntariness, thereby impacting the moral character of the act and diminishing the agent's responsibility.
There are five modifiers of human acts that call for detailed study:
Ignorance , Concupiscence, Fear ,Violence, Habit.
A). IGNORANCE- Ignorance is defined as the absence of intellectual knowledge in humans, and it can be negative when it
is a simple lack of knowledge or privative when it involves the absence of necessary knowledge. Ignorance takes on a
positive aspect when it includes false beliefs or mistaken judgments. This positive aspect is known as mistake or error. The
study of ignorance is approached in three ways: Object of Ignorance, Subject Ignorance and Result of Ignorance.
i. Object of Ignorance: This refers to the thing of which a person may be ignorant.
(a). Ignorance of law- refers to not knowing the existence of a duty, rule, or regulation.
(b). Ignorance of fact- refers to a lack of knowledge about the nature or circumstances that make an act forbidden by law.
(c). Ignorance of penalty- refers to a lack of knowledge about the specific sanction attached to a law.
ii. Subject of Ignorance: This pertains to the person in whom ignorance exists.
(a). Vincible ignorance -Ignorance that can and should be overcome by ordinary diligence.
(b). Invincible ignorance- Ignorance that cannot be dispelled by ordinary and proper diligence.
ii. Result of Ignorance- This focuses on the impact of ignorance on human acts. Ignorance can lead actions performed
without the necessary knowledge, and positive ignorance, such as mistakes or errors, arises when false beliefs are present.

(a). Antecedent ignorance- Precedes consent, as in a man missing Mass due to ignorance of his obligation, which is not
different from invincible ignorance.
(b). Concomitant ignorance- Refers to the ignorance accompanying an act that would have been performed even without
the ignorance, such as a nominal Catholic missing Mass despite knowing it's a holyday.
(c). Consequent ignorance -Ignorance that arises from an act of the will, either directly or indirectly. It is similar to
vincible ignorance, such as avoiding knowledge or failing to acquire it.
The ethical principles which emerge from our study of ignorance as a modifier of human acts are the following:
First principle: Invincible ignorance destroys the voluntariness of an act.
Voluntariness relies on knowledge and freedom, which in turn depends on free choice knowledge. Invincible ignorance,
an inevitable absence of knowledge, leads to acts lacking voluntariness and imputability. Examples include a Catholic child
using sinful language and worrying about past sins, which are not human acts.
Second principle: Vincible ignorance does not destroy the voluntariness of an act.
Vincible ignorance implies knowledge in an agent of their own ignorance and duty to dispel it, resulting in an act with
indirect voluntariness and imputable human act. This is illustrated by negligence.
Third principle: Vincible ignorance lessens the voluntariness of an act.
Vincible ignorance does not destroy an act's voluntariness, but it reduces it, diminishes the agent's responsibility, and
makes the act less human.
Fourth principle: Affected ignorance in one way lessens and in another way increases voluntariness.
Affected ignorance, fostered by will, is a direct and perfect lack of knowledge, reducing voluntariness in acts. It increases
voluntariness in acts that justify sin against laws.
B). CONCUPISCENCE- Concupiscence refers to the bodily appetites or tendencies, such as love, hatred, joy, grief, desire,
hope, courage, fear, and anger, which are often associated with frailty due to original sin. Antecedent passions arise
unstimulated by will-acts, while consequent passions are triggered by will. Examples include joy, anger, and desire for
revenge. Antecedent concupiscence is a non-voluntary act, while consequent concupiscence is the agent's fault, as it is willed
either directly or indirectly.
Ethical principles in the matter:
First principle: Antecedent concupiscence lessens the voluntariness of an act.
Ethicians use "voluntariness" to describe the human character of an act, but antecedent concupiscence lessens it due to its
impact on knowledge and freedom. This impairs the ability to make perfect voluntary acts, diminishing the agent's
responsibility.
Second principle: Antecedent concupiscence does not destroy the voluntariness of an act.
Antecedent concupisence reduces knowledge and freedom, but does not destroy them or cancel an agent's responsibility.
A man may sin gravely under antecedent passion, but his sin is less grave. Passion makes control difficult, but not
impossible.
Third principle: Consequent concupiscence, however great, does not lessen the voluntariness of an act.
Concupiscence, whether direct or indirect, leads to acts with proper voluntariness. For example, Jones plans revenge on
Morris and broods upon wrongs, leading to violence against Jenkins. Despite being insane with anger, the act remains willed
in cause, with its indirect voluntariness not diminished by concupiscence.
C). FEAR- Fear is a common passion in ethics, often causing the will to act in a certain way. It can be a cause or
accompanying circumstance, influencing actions such as sheltering from danger or staying in positions.
The ethical principle in this matter is:
Principle: An act done from fear, however great, is simply voluntary, although it is regularly also conditionally involuntary.
An act done from fear, however great, is simply voluntary and conditionally involuntary. Fear does not excuse evil acts,
but it makes them less perfectly human in character. The positive law of Church and State usually states that acts done from
grave fear, unjustly suffered, and excited directly to force an act against the agent's will are invalid or may be invalidated.
This principle highlights the importance of considering the common good when interpreting acts performed from fear.
D) .VIOLENCE- Violence is an external force used by free cause to force against a person's will, indirectly affecting their
Pwill, which is not directly controlled by the body.
Principle: Acts elicited by the will are not subject to violence; external acts caused by violence, to which due resistance is
offered, are in no wise imputable to the agent.
E). HABIT- Ethics focuses on operative habits, which are lasting readiness and facility for certain actions. Truthfulness is
essential, while lying or cursing requires special watchfulness to avoid evading truth.
Principle: Habit does not destroy voluntariness; and acts from habit are always voluntary, at least in cause, as long as the
habit is allowed to endure.
Habit does not destroy voluntariness, as the agent is fully responsible for human acts due to the force of habit. If John's
bad habit is overcome, he must consent to ceaseless watchfulness over his tongue. However, if John ceases to be watchful,
his evil words become imputable, even if they slip from him unnoticed.

Prepared by: Shanly B. Astorias

Cristina Arlante