scholarly journals The Theft: An Analysis of Moral Agency

Conatus ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 27
Author(s):  
Gerard Elfstrom
Keyword(s):  
Moral Agency ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Moral Agents ◽  
Moral Decisions

Adam and Eve’s theft marks the beginning of the human career as moral agents.   This article will examine the assumptions underlying the notion of moral agency from the perspective of three unremarkable human beings who found themselves in situations of moral difficulty.  The article will conclude that these three people could not have acted differently than they did.  It will conclude that it is unreasonable to assume that ordinary human beings will inevitably possess the resources to address difficult moral decisions.

scholarly journals Moral agents and legal persons: the ethics and the law of state responsibility

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 466-489 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sean Fleming
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Moral Agency ◽  
State Responsibility ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Functional Theory ◽  
Moral Agents ◽  
Corporate Moral Agency ◽  
The Law

Why, if at all, does it make sense to assign some responsibilities to states rather than to individuals? There are two contemporary answers. According to the agential theory, states can be held responsible because they are moral agents, much like human beings. According to the functional theory, states can be held responsible because they are legal persons that act vicariously through individuals, much like principals who act through agents. The two theories of state responsibility belong to parallel traditions of scholarship that have never been clearly distinguished. While the agential theory is dominant in IR, political theory, and philosophy, the functional theory prevails in International Law. The purpose of this article is to bridge the gulf between ethical and legal approaches to state responsibility. I argue that IR scholars and political theorists have much to gain from the functional theory. First, it provides a plausible alternative to the agential theory that avoids common objections to corporate moral agency. Second, the functional theory helps us to understand features of International Law that have puzzled IR scholars and political theorists, such as the fact that states are not held criminally responsible. I suggest that states can be ‘moral principals’ instead of moral agents.

scholarly journals Racionalidade e vulnerabilidade: elementos para a redefinição da sujeição moral

2007 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sônia T. Felipe
Keyword(s):  
Moral Philosophy ◽  
Moral Agency ◽  
Moral Agent ◽  
Necessary Condition ◽  
Central Question ◽  
Traditional Philosophy ◽  
Moral Agents ◽  
Moral Tradition ◽  
Moral Decisions ◽  
Tom Regan

A filosofia moral tradicional estabelece o critério da posse da razão como exigência para a definição da pertinência ou não de um sujeito à comunidade moral humana, e, pois, a ser considerado digno de respeito ético e justiça. Contrariando a tradição moral, Kenneth E. Goodpaster, Tom Regan e Paul W. Taylor redefinem a constituição da comunidade moral e o alcance da justiça, estabelecendo a perspectiva dos que são afetados pelas ações morais, não a dos sujeitos morais agentes, como a referência para se tomar decisões éticas relativas à justiça. Enquanto a filosofia moral tradicional considera apenas a categoria dos sujeitos morais agentes, estes autores desdobram a sujeição moral em duas possibilidades: a da agência e a da paciência moral. Com este desdobramento, mantêm-se a estatura dos agentes racionais como responsáveis pela moralidade, enquanto a vulnerabilidade às ações e decisões dos sujeitos morais agentes é levada em conta, permitindo a inclusão na comunidade moral e da justiça de interesses nãoracionais, de animais e ecossistemas nãoanimados, por exemplo. PALAVRAS-CHAVE – Agentes morais. Pacientes morais. Agência moral. Paciência moral. Responsabilidade. Vulnerabilidade. Kenneth E. Goodpaster. Tom Regan. Paul W. Taylor. ABSTRACT Traditional moral philosophy establishes reason as the only criterion for someone being morally considerable or recognized as member of the moral community. In contrast, Kenneth E. Goodpaster, Tom Regan and Paul W. Taylor do not agree with the moral tradition. On their perspective, the standpoint not of the agent but of the “patient” should be the central question of ethics in defining to whom principles of morality apply. While traditional philosophy operates only with the category of moral agents, these authors operates with both categories, moral agent and moral patient. They maintain that responsibility is the most significant question in defining the framework of human morality, a necessary condition to someone being considered a moral agent, possible only for rational beings, while vulnerability is the condition of being subjected to moral decisions and actions, independently of being rational or non rational. Being subjected to human morality is not a prerogative of rational beings. There are non rational interests common to humans, animals and plants, the inherent worth of life, for example, that are continuously subjected to human decisions. So, those have to be considered by ethics and justice. In order to be morally considerable it is not necessary to be rational, it is sufficient to be vulnerable to moral agency. KEY WORDS – Moral agent. Moral patient. Moral agency. Moral patience. Responsibility. Vulnerability. Kenneth E. Goodpaster. Tom Regan. Paul W. Taylor.

Good and Evil

2021 ◽  
pp. 89-120
Author(s):  
Bernard Reginster
Keyword(s):  
Moral Agency ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Normative Concept ◽  
Moral Agents ◽  
Freedom Of Will ◽  
Christian Morality ◽  
Good And Evil

This chapter examines Nietzsche’s genealogical account of the concepts “good and evil.” I suggest that the introduction of this conceptual pair involves two fundamental innovations, both of which motivated by ressentiment: a normative concept of equality, or the idea that all human beings have equal worth; and a certain conception of moral agency, centered around the possession of freedom of will, which underwrite a descriptive concept of equality, or the idea that all moral agents are not only subject to the new evaluative categories, but also may be expected to comply with them. I also examine the sense in which the invention of Christian morality constitutes an imaginary revenge, and argue that this indicates a change in the very character of the revenge, rather than an ordinary act of revenge that is merely imagined. I conclude with a discussion of the manner in which self-deception is involved in this imaginary revenge.

scholarly journals Relationships, Authority, and Reasons: A Second-Personal Account of Corporate Moral Agency

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
Alan D. Morrison ◽  
Rita Mota ◽  
William J. Wilhelm
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Culture ◽  
Moral Agency ◽  
Building Blocks ◽  
Moral Reasons ◽  
Corporate Communications ◽  
Personal Account ◽  
Moral Agents ◽  
Corporate Moral Agency ◽  
Fresh Perspective ◽  
Corporate Punishment

We present a second-personal account of corporate moral agency. This approach is in contrast to the first-personal approach adopted in much of the existing literature, which concentrates on the corporation’s ability to identify moral reasons for itself. Our account treats relationships and communications as the fundamental building blocks of moral agency. The second-personal account rests on a framework developed by Darwall. Its central requirement is that corporations be capable of recognizing the authority relations that they have with other moral agents. We discuss the relevance of corporate affect, corporate communications, and corporate culture to the second-personal account. The second-personal account yields a new way to specify first-personal criteria for moral agency, and it generates fresh insights into the reasons those criteria matter. In addition, a second-personal analysis implies that moral agency is partly a matter of policy, and it provides a fresh perspective on corporate punishment.

Taming the Corporate Monster: An Aristotelian Approach to Corporate Virtue

2000 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 711-723 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karl Schudt
Keyword(s):  
Resource Management ◽  
Human Activity ◽  
Corporate Ethics ◽  
Efficient Production ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Moral Agents ◽  
Corporate Entity ◽  
Right Relationship ◽  
Ethical Systems ◽  
Production Resource

Abstract:Corporations are often considered as moral agents. Traditional ethical systems are directed toward human beings—how could human rules be expected to apply to corporations? In this paper an alternative system of ethics is proposed, tailored specifically for the corporate entity. I use the method of Aristotle, in which the character traits (virtues) that are conducive to the goal of human activity, happiness, are derived. For corporations, the goal is taken to be the traditional capitalist one of sustainable profit, and corresponding corporate virtues are derived. I argue that corporate virtues such as Efficient Production, Resource Management, Correct Pricing, and Right Relationship will be beneficial to human beings. It is profitable to consider the interests of human beings, because the corporation will avoid a costly war of offense and retaliation. A corporate ethics is developed that protects humans and has motivating force not based on human nature, but rather profit.

scholarly journals Why Can´t We Regard Robots As People?

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-61
Author(s):  
André Schmiljun
Keyword(s):  
Autonomous Robots ◽  
Moral Standing ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Moral Agents ◽  
Artificial Moral Agents ◽  
Reductive Physicalism

With the development of autonomous robots, one day probably capable of speaking, thinking and learning, self-reflecting, sharing emotions, in fact, with the raise of robots becoming artificial moral agents (AMAs) robot scientists like Abney, Veruggio and Petersen are already optimistic that sooner or later we need to call those robots “people” or rather “Artificial People” (AP). The paper rejects this forecast, due to its argument based on three metaphysical conflicting assumptions. Firstly, it is the idea that it is possible to precisely define persons and apply the definition to robots or use it to differentiate human beings from robots. Further, the argument of APs favors a position of non-reductive physicalism (second assumption) and materialism (third assumption), finally producing weird convictions about future robotics. Therefore, I will suggest to follow Christine Korsgaard’s defence of animals as ends in themselves with moral standing. I will show that her argument can be transmitted to robots, too, at least to robots which are capable of pursuing their own good (even if they are not rational). Korsgaard’s interpretation of Kant delivers an option that allows us to leave out complicated metaphysical notions like “person” or “subject” in the debate, without denying robots’ status as agents.

Receptivity and Creativity in Hermeneutics

2016 ◽  
pp. 225-239
Author(s):  
Chung-ying Cheng
Keyword(s):  
Phenomenological Approach ◽  
The Other ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Human Capabilities ◽  
Moral Agents ◽  
The World ◽  
Human Understanding ◽  
Positive Projection ◽  
The One ◽  
Coming To Know

There are two aspects of the hermeneutic: the receptive and the creative. The receptive of the hermeneutic consists in coming to know and acknowledge what has happened, observing what there is as historically effected, foretelling what will happen as a matter of projection of future possibilities, and disclosing / discovering transcendental conditions, fore-structures or horizons of human understanding and interpretation; the creative of the hermeneutic, on the other hand, consists in realizing and demonstrating human sensibilities and human capabilities and needs, conceptualizing what is factual and real based on human cognitive and volitional faculties and experiences, developing values and pursuing regulative ideals of actions, and searching for best possible ways or methods to reach for individual and communal end-goals which will enhance human beings as autonomous entities and moral agents in the world. The receptive is represented by the phenomenological approach to Being and reality whereas the creative is conveyed by an ontology of reflection of human being for self-definition and self-cultivation of human faculties. This amounts to bringing out an existing distinction between ming (what is imparted) and li (the presupposed ground) on the one hand and xing ( human potentiality for being in oneself) and xin (human understanding and interpretation toward action) on the other in the tradition of Confucian metaphysics.Next, I shall focus on Heidegger and Gadamer as taking ontological receptivity (as a matter of fore-structures of Being or Language of human understanding) as the source of meaning of existence and meaningfulness of texts. Th ere are of course creative elements to be identifi ed with forming investigative projects of the Dasein for disclosing truth of the Being, but the main tone is to realize the Being or Language as base structures of our hermeneutic consciousness or hermeneutic space of understanding. Because of spacelimitation, however, I shall leave to another occasion the discussion of the creative formation and positive projection of a transformative cosmological philosophy in the Yijing tradition as represented in my onto-hermeneutics which takes experiences of ≫comprehensive observation≪ (guan) and ≫feeling- refl ection≪ (gan) as two avenues toward human understanding and hermeneutic enterprise of interpretation.

Moral agents

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vinit Haksar
Keyword(s):  
Young Children ◽  
Free Will ◽  
Moral Agency ◽  
Moral Agent ◽  
Strong Version ◽  
Moral Law ◽  
Inner Life ◽  
Moral Understanding ◽  
Moral Agents ◽  
Concern For Others

Moral agents are those agents expected to meet the demands of morality. Not all agents are moral agents. Young children and animals, being capable of performing actions, may be agents in the way that stones, plants and cars are not. But though they are agents they are not automatically considered moral agents. For a moral agent must also be capable of conforming to at least some of the demands of morality. This requirement can be interpreted in different ways. On the weakest interpretation it will suffice if the agent has the capacity to conform to some of the external requirements of morality. So if certain agents can obey moral laws such as ‘Murder is wrong’ or ‘Stealing is wrong’, then they are moral agents, even if they respond only to prudential reasons such as fear of punishment and even if they are incapable of acting for the sake of moral considerations. According to the strong version, the Kantian version, it is also essential that the agents should have the capacity to rise above their feelings and passions and act for the sake of the moral law. There is also a position in between which claims that it will suffice if the agent can perform the relevant act out of altruistic impulses. Other suggested conditions of moral agency are that agents should have: an enduring self with free will and an inner life; understanding of the relevant facts as well as moral understanding; and moral sentiments, such as capacity for remorse and concern for others. Philosophers often disagree about which of these and other conditions are vital; the term moral agency is used with different degrees of stringency depending upon what one regards as its qualifying conditions. The Kantian sense is the most stringent. Since there are different senses of moral agency, answers to questions like ‘Are collectives moral agents?’ depend upon which sense is being used. From the Kantian standpoint, agents such as psychopaths, rational egoists, collectives and robots are at best only quasi-moral, for they do not fulfil some of the essential conditions of moral agency.

Moral psychology

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Slote
Keyword(s):  
Free Will ◽  
Virtue Ethics ◽  
Moral Psychology ◽  
Moral Evaluation ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
Psychological Issues ◽  
Moral Agents ◽  
Moral Weakness ◽  
Moral Requirements ◽  
Wrong Action

Moral psychology as a discipline is centrally concerned with psychological issues that arise in connection with the moral evaluation of actions. It deals with the psychological presuppositions of valid morality, that is, with assumptions it seems necessary for us to make in order for there to be such a thing as objective or binding moral requirements: for example, if we lack free will or are all incapable of unselfishness, then it is not clear how morality can really apply to human beings. Moral psychology also deals with what one might call the psychological accompaniments of actual right, or wrong, action, for example, with questions about the nature and possibility of moral weakness or self-deception, and with questions about the kinds of motives that ought to motivate moral agents. Moreover, in the approach to ethics known as ‘virtue ethics’ questions about right and wrong action merge with questions about the motives, dispositions, and abilities of moral agents, and moral psychology plays a more central role than it does in other forms of ethical theory.

The Uses and Abuses of Narrative for Life

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hanna Meretoja
Keyword(s):  
Moral Agency ◽  
Narrative Ethics ◽  
Behavioral Patterns ◽  
Blind Side ◽  
Ethical Evaluation ◽  
Moral Agents ◽  
Narrative Imagination ◽  
Culture Of Silence ◽  
The Continuum

Chapter 4 tests hermeneutic narrative ethics as a lens for analyzing the (ab)uses of narrative for life in Julia Franck’s Die Mittagsfrau (2007, The Blind Side of the Heart), exploring how narrative practices expand and diminish the space of possibilities in which moral agents act and suffer. It demonstrates how narrative “in-betweens” bind people together, through dialogic narrative imagination, and can promote exclusion that amounts to annihilation. It addresses the necessity of storytelling for survival, and a transgenerational culture of silence that leads to the repetition of harmful emotional-behavioral patterns. It explores the continuum from being able to tell one’s own stories to violently imposed narrative identities and suggests that moral agency requires a minimum narrative sense of oneself as a being worthy and capable of goodness. The chapter argues that the ethical evaluation of narrative practices must be contextual—sensitive to how they function in particular sociohistorical worlds.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document