Acts & Intentions

Not everything we do constitutes full-blown action. For example, things done because of external force or reflex or when intoxicated or distracted are not normally classed and judged as genuine acts. By contrast, behaviour we deliberate about and choose for ourselves is action - we are morally responsible for it.

How do we tell when an action is morally acceptable? Basically, by considering its 'object', the state of affairs we aim to bring about through it (eg the object of theft is to deprive another of his due). The best guide here is to discover the intention behind the act. We are said to intend everything we directly aim at and any steps we adopt along the way.

Catholic philosophers have often distinguished intentionally doing something evil (eg killing) from intentionally doing something good which also involves accepting, but not intending, something evil (eg saving one's life by mortally wounding an attacker). The latter but not the former may be morally acceptable. This way of thinking is sometimes described as the 'principle of double effect'. It's an important guide to moral truth, but it can be misused if we are not clear what an intention is.