LEARNING OUTCOMES

At the end of this module, the students should be able to:

1 Define the principle of Double Effect;

2
Determine the Additional Modifiers
of Responsibility

3 Apply the principles of double

effect/indirect voluntary
 INDIRECT VOLUNTARY
• There is a difference between the
way in which the act itself is
voluntary and the way in which its
consequences are voluntary.
 INDIRECT VOLUNTARY
• There is a difference between the way in which the act itself is voluntary and the
way in which its consequences are voluntary.

• Something is directly voluntary when it is

the thing willed, whether it be willed as an
end or as means to an end. Something is
indirectly voluntary when it is the
unintended but foreseen consequence of
something else that is directly voluntary;
INDIRECT VOLUNTARY

• The agent wills the

cause of which this is a
necessary effect. Thus
one who throws a bomb
at a king to assassinate
him, knowing that he
will kill the king’s
attendants also,
INDIRECT VOLUNTARY

• directly wills the throwing

of the bomb (as means), also
directly wills the death of
the king (as end), and
indirectly wills the death of
the attendants (as
consequence) though their
death gives him no profit.
INDIRECT VOLUNTARY

• directly wills the throwing

of the bomb (as means), also
directly wills the death of
the king (as end), and
indirectly wills the death of
the attendants (as
consequence) though their
death gives him no profit.
INDIRECT VOLUNTARY

Having examined the

voluntariness of the
assassins action with regard
to the deaths of the king, the
attendants, and the possible
innocent bystanders, we are
now in a position to assess
his responsibility for these
various deaths.
 The distinction between the directly and the
indirectly voluntary acts helps us to articulate
what is happening psychologically, namely,
that the assassin by his act directly intends
the death of the king and is willing to accept
the foreseen deaths of the attendants and
possibly those of innocent bystanders.
• The assassin must be assigned complete
responsibility for the kings death, but
how much responsibility does he have
for all the other deaths?
• Even if he is reluctant to accept the
other deaths, must he accept complete
responsibility for them?
Those deaths may be an unfortunate
side effect of the killing of the king,
but his foreseeing them was not
sufficient to deter him from killing
the king and so he has complete
responsibility for them.
• Good or indifferent actions also may have evil
physical consequences that can be foreseen.

• How responsible are we for these physical evils?

• Must we always refuse to do a good act if we

foresee that it will or can have some physical evil
as one of its effects?
If we were obliged to
avoid every action
that will result in
physical evil, life in
this world would soon
become unlivable,
impossible to bear
The world in which
we live is a mixture
of good and evil that
affects each of us as
we try to live an
upright moral life.
There is a solution to
the dilemma in the
principle of the
indirect voluntary,
commonly known as
the principle of the
double effect.
The first part of this
principle is that no
evil must ever be
willed simply for its
own sake either as end
(goal) or as means,
The second part of the principle is that evil
may be willed indirectly, that is to say, as a
foreseen but unwanted consequence, such an
act is indirectly voluntary and may be willed
only if it can somehow be reduced to an
incidental and unavoidable by-product or
side effect in the achievement of some good
the person is rightly seeking.
The principle of double effect
says that it is morally
allowable to perform an act
that has an evil effect under
the following conditions:
1. THE ACT TO BE DONE MUST BE
GOOD IN ITSELF OR AT LEAST
INDIFFERENT.
This is evident, for if
the act is evil of itself, evil
would be chosen directly,
either as an end or as a
means to an end, and
there could be no question
of merely permitting or
tolerating it.
 2. THE GOOD INTENDED
MUST NOT BE OBTAINED BY
MEANS OF THE EVIL
EFFECT.
The evil must
be only an incidental
by-product and not
an actual factor in
the accomplishment
of the good.
3. THE EVIL EFFECT MUST
NOT BE INTENDED FOR
ITSELF BUT ONLY
PERMITTED.
The bad effect may
be of its own nature merely
a by-product of the act per
formed, but if the agent
wants this bad effect,
he or she makes it directly
voluntary by willing it.
 4. THERE MUST BE A
PROPORTIONATELY
GRAVE REASON FOR
PERMITTING THE EVIL
EFFECT.
Though we are not
always obliged to
prevent evil, we are
obliged to prevent a
serious evil by a small
sacrifice of our
own good.
RESPONSIBILITY
FOR THE ACTS OF
OTHERS
 Only the person who
knowingly and willingly
does an act can be
responsible for it.
 OCCASION OF EVIL
The word scandal originally meant a
stumbling block, and metaphorically
something we trip on and fall over in
our moral career.
OCCASION OF EVIL
• We give occasion of evil to
another directly if we intend
his or her evil act either as an
end or as a means.
 OCCASION OF EVIL
The direct voluntariness of this
direct giving of occasion of evil
makes for complete responsibility
for the evil on the part of the giver.
 OCCASION OF EVIL
The takers responsibility is
also complete if the evil is
done knowingly and willingly;
COOPERATION IN EVIL
Cooperation in another’s evil deed
may occur by joining that person in
the actual performance of the act or
by supplying him or her with the
means for performing it.
Situational Analysis
• Analyze the situation using the • Justify your perspectives based
principle of double-effect. on the principle of double effect.

• Discuss and come up with a

potential actions that could be
taken in a given situation,
considering both intended and
unintended consequences.
• In a war-torn country, a military commander
is faced with a difficult decision. There is a
strategically located enemy base that poses
a significant threat to innocent civilians in
nearby villages. The commander has the
option to launch an airstrike on the enemy
base, which would likely eliminate the
threat but may also result in civilian
casualties. However, not taking action could
lead to even more civilian deaths in the long
run as the enemy base continues to plan
attacks on nearby villages.