Proportionalism and Passions

Proportionalism, and Passions and the Moral Life

I. Proportionalism: See text, Living the Good Life, pp. 155ff.

Moral Theory

Classical Moral Reasoning

Proportionalism or Revisionism

Gist

The criteria for judging whether a particular act is good or bad lie within the act itself: object and intention

The criteria for judging whether a particular act is good or bad do not reside in the act itself but rather in the totality of the intentions and circumstances surrounding the act.

Proportionalism judges the goodness or badness of a particular act based on the proportion of the goodness or evilness of the outcomes or consequences of the act.

Thus, its basic principle can be called "the principle of the greater good," or more commonly, "the principle of the lesser evil." Persons should choose the available alternative which brings about the most good or least evil (as these are judged by the agent or doer of the act).

Explanation

Acts are intrinsically good or evil in themselves and, as such, by their very nature either orient man to his final end, interpersonal communion with God, or turn him away from that end.

Denies that some acts are intrinsically evil, and as such, are absolutely incapable of advancing a man to his true end: interpersonal communion with God. Or that they do the opposite – that they, of themselves, lead man away from God.

Further this view denies that the determinative consequences are intrinsic to the act itself, erroneously assuming that the determinative consequences are those subjectively perceived by the agent.

Another way of stating things, is that proportionalism leaves it to the agent of an act to decide whether the object is good or bad based upon whether he (the agent) judges the good consequences of the act to outweigh the bad consequences.

Comment

Acceptable moral reasoning from Catholic perspective

Unacceptable moral reasoning from Catholic perspective, for reasons that should be clear from the "Explanation."

Example: A 35 year old mother of three becomes pregnant for the fourth time. She is trying to decide whether to have an abortion.

    The proportionalist tells her to make a list of the good and bad consequences of each decision. For example, on the one side there is the evil of killing her child and, on the other, the good of not having the family disrupted by a new baby, preserving her life with its present peace and security, and keeping her husband from becoming even more worried about money.

    The problem is that there is no way really to weigh the evil of killing against the good of a peaceful existence. For the guilt of having done wrong could actually destroy her own peace and that of the family.

Another example: Married man wants to have an affair with a cute little lass at work.

    He goes through the proportionalist reasoning process. On the one side, having the affair will involve deceiving his wife, breaking his marriage vows, and some added expenses; but, on the other, he figures he will be happier and more relaxed at home and a better family man on account of it.

    Here again there are problems – obviously, he has not thought of ALL of effects of having an affair (for example, what his wife will do if she learns of it: will she agree that having him more relaxed at home makes the affair okay?) and, besides, how does one weigh the evil of infidelity against the good of being relaxed?

II. Passions and the Moral Life

The passions (emotions) are good in themselves and are meant to be helpful in the moral life. But since the fall of Adam, our emotions, like our other faculties, have become disordered and, therefore, will lead us toward good or evil depending....

Love ----> Desire ----> Joy [Read: what we love, we desire and when we possess it we are joyful]

Hate ----> Avoidance ----> Sorrow [Read: what we hate, we avoid and when it comes to pass we are sorrowful]

These sets of opposite emotions serve our moral lives when what our emotions perceive to be good is truly good, and what they perceive to be evil is truly evil. But if we confuse what is evil with what is good, then our emotions will lead us astray. Therefore, we must learn to recognize and love what is truly good and recognize and abhor what is truly evil.

There is another set of emotions which assist us when the good we desire is hard to obtain or the evil we hate is hard to avoid. These are:

Hope-- aroused when the good we desire is not easily attained <--------> Despair– aroused when difficulties between us and deisred good is overwhelming
Fear –when evil is lurking nearby                                              <-------->   Courage – is what we need to face the fear

                          Anger – aroused when what we love is under attack (anger has no opposite)

Note: with respect to the emotions generally, spontaneous feelings do not have moral quality because they are not willed. Once they are willed or nurtured, however, they are morally good or evil according to the object and intention.

Moral Theory	Classical Moral Reasoning	Proportionalism or Revisionism
Gist	The criteria for judging whether a particular act is good or bad lie within the act itself: object and intention	The criteria for judging whether a particular act is good or bad do not reside in the act itself but rather in the totality of the intentions and circumstances surrounding the act. Proportionalism judges the goodness or badness of a particular act based on the proportion of the goodness or evilness of the outcomes or consequences of the act. Thus, its basic principle can be called "the principle of the greater good," or more commonly, "the principle of the lesser evil." Persons should choose the available alternative which brings about the most good or least evil (as these are judged by the agent or doer of the act).
Explanation	Acts are intrinsically good or evil in themselves and, as such, by their very nature either orient man to his final end, interpersonal communion with God, or turn him away from that end.	Denies that some acts are intrinsically evil, and as such, are absolutely incapable of advancing a man to his true end: interpersonal communion with God. Or that they do the opposite – that they, of themselves, lead man away from God. Further this view denies that the determinative consequences are intrinsic to the act itself, erroneously assuming that the determinative consequences are those subjectively perceived by the agent. Another way of stating things, is that proportionalism leaves it to the agent of an act to decide whether the object is good or bad based upon whether he (the agent) judges the good consequences of the act to outweigh the bad consequences.
Comment	Acceptable moral reasoning from Catholic perspective	Unacceptable moral reasoning from Catholic perspective, for reasons that should be clear from the "Explanation."