Essay on Freedom and Rationality

1. Answer the questions below.
1. What is a human act? Give an example.
Human acts are acts that a man performs in his capacity. It is done with full will,
knowledge, and a thorough deliberation thus human acts are those that the agent is a
controller of since he performs them with full knowledge and free choice. These acts are
the result of man’s conscious decisions. The mind and intellect understanding is used to
enlighten a person’s will. When a man acts deliberately, he is responsible for his actions.
Therefore, a man is responsible for such activities and he can admit that he did them
because he wanted to, and he can explain why he did so. The actions done by the man
can be classified as either moral or immoral from a moral standpoint. The intellect and
the will's intervention are not two separate acts, but two components of every human act.
Human acts are certain persons who know and decide at the same time while using their
intellect and will. The intellect directs the will to want the object that it offers in a human
deed, and the will directs the intellect to know. An example of human acts includes doing
home works, going to school, and giving material things to the poor.
2. What is an act of man? Give an example.
Acts of man are those that a person does without being able to control them with his
brain or volition. Morality does not concern itself with man's actions because they are not
voluntary. Acts of man are performed without the permission and the idea of the will. The
performing of such activity is not entirely agreed, planned, or done with intention. Acts of
man do not operate with rationality and are classified as an involuntary act. An example
of acts of man includes digestion, heartbeat, development, physical reactions, and visual
or auditory sensations, and sense faculties actions. A person who is unable to reason,
children, and deranged persons are also examples of acts of man.
3. What is freedom? Explain each type of freedom briefly.
Freedom is the state of being free and at liberty. It is the state of being free from any
external control, regulation, or interference. Those that are under restrictions and
confinement is not considered freedom thus they are not considered free. There are
different kinds of freedom which include freedom from, freedom of, freedom to, and
freedom for. In freedom from or negative freedom, a person is prevented to do something
that he/she wants due to external interferences that affect that person. These
interferences are brought by the people surrounding the person. Less negative freedom
or freedom would result in lesser problems that are created between a certain person and
that person’s desires and want. The second type of freedom is freedom of or positive
freedom. In freedom, one can control his/her own life. This type of freedom allows a
person to consciously make his/her own decisions, create one’s purpose, and act instead
of being acted upon. The third type of freedom is the freedom to which relates to political
freedom. This type of freedom is defined as freedom from any oppression or coercion.

2. Political freedom is the freedom of a citizen’s nation to participate freely in any political
process. This freedom involves the ability to influence and guide the public to advocate
their rights and positions. The last freedom is freedom for which is related to cooperative
freedom. Cooperative freedom is the freedom wherein a person or individual is free to
cooperate with others in any group.
4. How important is freedom in the study of ethics?
Freedom is an essential component of ethics. Without the idea of freedom in ethics, a
person may not be able to make meaningful, reasonable, and acceptable moral decisions.
When people are free, they can make moral decisions that are critical to the well-being of
their society and environment. With the help of freedom in ethics, one may freely choose
the right decision without any restraints and regulations. However, if a person’s freedom
becomes regulated and restrained, the person may no longer be able to exercise the
good since they may be forced to do the bad. If people were expected to make moral
decisions, then they should be giving the free will to do so without anyone or anything
governing their decisions and actions.
5. How does freedom affect moral responsibility?
Moral responsibility and freedom are closely related to a person’s actions and
decisions. Being in a state of liberty is classified as being relieved from any ascendancy
or dominations thus being free from any force or captivity. If a person is not free, then
that person does not become morally responsible for his/her actions. Those who are not
free to do actions are therefore not accountable for such actions. An example of such a
situation is when a person was forced to do a bad action such as being forced to steal a
thing from the department store since he/she was told to do so. The stealer of the said
action is therefore not held morally responsible for the immoral action since he/she was
not in the state of being free as he/she was only instructed to perform such action.
II. Analyze the case below.
Father Lorenzo, a young Catholic missionary, has been kidnapped by a group of
radical activists. In an attempt to make him renounce his faith, the notorious leader of the
group threatens to kill all the faithful in the missionary's town if his demands are not met.
1. Would the missionary be morally responsible if he decides to abandon his
people?
Based on the situation, the missionary, Father Lorenzo, will not be morally responsible
for abandoning his people. The missionary, Father Lorenzo, shall not be held responsible
since he was restricted to act freely according to his will. Although Father Lorenzo could
choose his decision, the process of choosing such decisions is due to the negative
circumstances surrounding him and the decision.

3. 2. Would he be morally responsible if he defends his faith?
In the situation, given the situation, Father Lorenzo, would not be morally responsible
for defending his faith. When a person welcomes a series of options to reach a conclusive
decision, moral freedom sets off. In the situation, Father Lorenzo would not be held
responsible since he was in a state of burden. The situation contradicts the idea of
freedom since freedom is defined as being clear from any burdensome and disagreeable
situation.
3. Would he be freed from moral responsibility?
According to St. Thomas Aquinas, freedom must occur before choosing a decision
and the situation of Father Lorenzo states otherwise. In the given situation, Father
Lorenzo was not free when he was to decide whether to abandon his people or to defend
his faith therefore he cannot be directly indicted as morally responsible. As stated
previously if a person is not free, then that person is not morally responsible for his/her
actions and therefore not accountable for such actions.
4. What type of freedom does the priest lose in the situation?
The type of freedom present in Father Lorenzo’s situation is freedom from or negative
freedom. As previously stated, freedom from is a type of freedom wherein a person is
prevented to perform something that he/she wants to do due to external interferences
and factors that affect that person and his freedom. Moreover, this type of freedom is
brought by people surrounding the person which may affect the person’s freedom. I
classified Father Lorenzo’s situation as freedom from or negative freedom since he was
prevented to do something that he wants to do and he was also disturbed and burdened
by the people around him which were the kidnappers. This type of freedom cannot be
classified as the freedom to, freedom for, and freedom of since the situation does not
imply as such. All in all, considering the factors and circumstances surrounding Father
Lorenzo’s situation, the freedom present is freedom from.