Readings for Module 1- Lesson 2

The Moral Agent

Postulates of Morality
As already hinted in the discussion above, there seems to be a moral call for every human
being to do virtuous deeds or acts. It is an imperative for every one, that every human being
endowed with reason must become a moral person. There is, in short, a moral oughtness. The
right question to ask is, “Why should I be moral?” or “Why ought I be moral?”

The great German ethicist and moral philosopher, Immanuel Kant, attempted to provide
explanation and justification for this moral imperative. To do so, he formulated the three moral
postulates as the necessary explanation to the question, “Why one should be moral?” Kant call
them as postulates to morality for he has no intention to prove them, or even if he has the
intention, he can neither prove them objectively. By calling them as postulates, he presented
them only as suggestions. There is no need to prove them but simply assume them as true for
the purposes of discussion. You need to put in mind that Kant was a devout protestant himself.
Within Kant’s philosophical frame, Kant acknowledged that there are indeed things in this world
that are beyond our human capacity to know. In Kant’s epistemology, he calls this realm as the
unknowable “noumenon.” Thus, in Kant’s mind, it would be better to simply presume that these
things exist. For Kant, the three moral postulates are the following:

(1) The Existence of Free Will and Intellect.

This first postulate by Kant would simply put emphasis on the fact that every rational
human being is endowed with the intellect that allows them the capability to know and
decide on their own actions. And since every individual is endowed with the intellect that
freely decides, you are also thereby granted with the freedom to freely perform your own
actions, and the natural will to freely decide on your own actions. The immediate
outcome from this is that you deserve a reward for your good actions if such actions
were acted out of your own total freedom, and not acted out due to coercion from the
outside. To put simply, why would one reward an act that was not done out of your own
decision, freedom, volition, will, and choosing? The action should be voluntary, in the first
place, to deserve such reward for an ethical act.

(2) The Immortality of the Human Soul.

In line with Kant’s ethical frame, it would also be important to presume that every
human being is endowed with a human soul that is immortal. Do not fall into the trap of
thinking that Kant’s understanding of a human being is one who has the hunger for
rewards. As a matter of fact, Kant puts emphasis on the concept of duty towards one’s
fellow human being and to his Creator. However, recognizing the harsh realities of
human life, at some point you may fall into the trap of thinking that you have not been
rewarded for all your good actions. A human person, as frail as you are, may become
desperate that despite all your efforts to become good, you have not received any
reward for all your efforts and sacrifices. Hence, the idea of immortality provides the
hope that sometime in a person’s life, and even beyond your mortal physical presence
 on this wretched earth, a glimmer of hope for eternal salvation is still coming in the after-
life. An absolute eternal reward is waiting for you who deserve such for the all the good
things that you have done on this earth.

(3) The Existence of a Supreme Being, or God.

An absolute eternal reward in the heavens can only be possible with the presence of
an eternal all-powerful living God. The Almighty Living God is the absolute arbiter of your
actions and the final judge who decides your eternal fate and destiny, not necessarily in
the after-life though, as good deeds can also be rewarded through grace while still on
this earth. However, you should be careful into thinking that God and immortality are the
only reason and justification for being good. Besides faith, there are secular and worldly
justifications and reasons on why you should remain morally upright. For instance, the
atheist German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche maintained that morality is intrinsic to
the actions. For Nietzsche, God willed and commanded such good deeds and actions
because they are already good in themselves. In addition, the renowned father of
psychology Sigmund Freud also maintained that there are practical reasons for
self-preservation to remain a good person capable of doing good, since doing otherwise
would put you and your own life in jeopardy, at risk and in peril as the consequences for
one’s bad and evil deeds and acts. There is the principle of retribution for one’s evil
deeds as it also deserves such punishment and retaliation. And if you may happen to
escape from the liability and responsibility of your actions, such as, when you hide from
the law, you cannot still escape from the eyes of God who is capable to subject a sinner
to eternal damnation (Stewart, et.al., 2013, 304-310).

Agents of Morality
Again, it is only human beings who are the sole agents of morality. It is only human beings
since they are the only ones endowed with intellect that is capable of rationality. Animals unlike
man cannot be held responsible for their actions since they are not capable of reason but are
rather guided by their instincts. A poisonous snake, for example, cannot be held morally liable
for the death of a child it has bitten. Nor are the trees that fell in the house during the typhoon.
Human beings, as moral agents are capable of shaping the world.

There is a high demand for human beings to take the responsibility as the sole moral agents
of this world. With this great and powerful capability of the human rationality comes the great
responsibility for humankind concerning the future of this world. In the religious and biblical
sense, God has entrusted to human beings the responsibility to take care of the environment
and the welfare of the planet. In a moral sense, only human beings are capable to distinguish
what is right from wrong. With this great power and responsibility, there is a greater demand for
human beings to take actions to ensure and determine the future of the planet, and the future of
humanity.
Foundation of Morality: Freedom and Responsibility
Freedom

When we were born, we have no idea of the concepts of right and wrong, good, and bad.
Our whole world is dependent on the love and care we received from our parents, guardians,
and other members of our family. Growing- up, we are slowly made aware of what actions/
behaviors are considered good, what are bad, what should be learned and what should be
avoided. In other words, growing-up with people who love and care for us and interacting with
society made us aware of what in life is important and what will make us happy. Our
experiences, therefore, give value to our lives which before had none. These values must be
created and given to us since they do not pre-exist and it is the family around us who must do
this (Holmes, 1998).

As we grow-up, armed with the values that define us as a person, the field is now open for us
to use these as guides in making life’s choices. Essential to accomplishing this is the freedom
for us to make these choices. Freedom is a necessary component of human existence at all
levels of morality. It is, however, more than just doing what we want without hindrance,
coercion, or restraint but moral freedom. Moral freedom is not the right to do what you want but
rather the strength to do what is right.

Freedom is important to existence because it allows us to develop our morality. We should

be free to make our own choices. Mistakes will be made along the way, but such errors in
judgment serve as important jewels of learning which we need to be considered as truly mature
human beings. According to Vaughn (2008), to not exercise the freedom to choose has the
following drawbacks:

1. It deprives the person the right to make choices. Being human means having the
freedom to make choices. To not be able to do this, lowers the stature of man to that of
a beast and denies him the chance to fulfill his destiny.

2. His responses to moral dilemmas will be incomplete, confused or mistaken. He will be

deprived of the knowledge of the consequences of his choices. Thus, he fails learn and
grow as a mature human being.

3. The person will be deprived of intellectual moral growth. Maintaining neutrality or blindly
accepting moral beliefs may end in denying all morality.

When we are dominated by others, we fail to realize our dignity as a person which prevents
us from attaining full potential and creativity. Freedom provides the opportunities to make
possible activities and projects that enable us to live comfortably with one another. Without
freedom, society will be trapped in a primitive age with no progress in the human sciences,
physical sciences and the arts. Thus, when we are given the freedom to choose, we attain
dignity as human beings and provided with the chance to achieve our full potential.
Responsibility

The freedom to make choices, however, is not the goal of moral freedom. If this were so,
then we would be haphazardly making choices left and right based on the values and beliefs
that we have. In the real world, choices made come with consequences. It is these
consequences that makes the freedom to choose more difficult.

To be considered a grown-up and to have the freedom to choose means being responsible
for the choices made. Responsibility is accountability for the task or duty that we are required or
expected to do (Merriam and Webster). According to Elbert Hubbard (1856 - 1915),
responsibility is the price of freedom and freedom cannot be separated from responsibility. This
is the reason why we would sometimes refuse to make the choice. We would rather not take
responsibility for the negative consequences of our choices. But freedom entails that we be
responsible for our actions including how these actions affect others.

Oftentimes, we would opt to take refuge in the ready-made values of religion or society and
hide behind supposedly eternal principles to rid ourselves of the burden of responsibility. But
such is the price of moral freedom (Holmes, 1998). This is why some of us do not like to be
free, for freedom entails responsibility and some cannot endure the burden of responsibility.
However, in moral freedom comes with moral responsibility.

Characteristics of the Moral Agent

A. Moral Character
Oftentimes, we hear a person being described as having lots of character or that another
should develop his character to be appreciated a lot more. Character refers to a set of qualities
that make us unique and standout from the others. In the context of morality, having a good
moral character will help us adapt to our environment for us to realize our potentials and fulfill
our nature (“Moral Character”,n.d.). Psychologist Lawrence Pervin (1936 -2016) defined moral
character as a “disposition to express behavior in consistent patterns across a range of
situations.”

According to Alan Zimmerman (1997), a person with a good moral character, is described as
someone:

● With the right values. We should know what is important for us and should live our
lives based on the things that we value. People differ in what they value and in different
degrees. Some would value happiness while others would value success. In the
context of morality, having a good moral character means, we value “goodness and
being good” more.

● Who does the right thing. It is sometimes difficult to do the right thing especially if
everybody else is doing otherwise. To risk being unpopular because you did what you
 think you ought to do is a measure of character. There is no way for a wrong deed to be
done right and there is never a wrong time to do the right deed.

● Who is considered to be the right kind of person. Gordon H. Taggart (1916 – 1997)
is an inspirational writer who described eleven characteristics of the right kind of person:

1. Honest enough to admit his 7.Wise enough to recognize his

shortcomings. mistakes.

2.Brilliant enough to accept flattery 8.Humble enough to appreciate

without making him arrogant. greatness.

3. Tall enough to tower above deceit. 9.Staunch enough to stand by his

friends.

4. Strong enough to treasure love. 10. Human enough to be thoughtful of

his neighbor.

5. Brave enough to welcome criticism. 11. Righteous enough to be devoted to

the love of God.

6.Compassionate enough to
understand human frailties.

Determinants of a Moral Character

Plato (428 BCE – 348 BCE), a famous Greek philosopher, enumerated three factors that
affect the development of a person’s moral character:

● Native traits. These are the genetic characteristics that had been passed down to us
through the generations. Hereditary traits may impact on our choices and decisions
predisposing us toward certain actions. Many recent studies on the physiology of
behavior supports the idea that a significant percentage of behavior is biologically
determined.

● Early Childhood Development. Studies in the social sciences have revealed that we
are strongly influenced to conform with the culture that surrounds us. If this is so, the
influence will be strongest when we were children. According to Plato, the very young
have no pre-existing values and dispositions. Our absorbent minds would just accept
the beliefs and values culture creates for us.
 ● Surrounding Culture. As we grow and develop, we are continuously expose to many
factors in our environment that plays a major part into the kind of person we become.
Some of these factors are: the important adults in our lives, whose behaviors we model,
the influence of our peers, the news and social media, the teachings of schools and
religious institutions and the general physical and social environment. Each of this
influence the way we think, feel, behave, and make choices to a greater or lesser
degree.

Aside from the factors mentioned above, two other factors that impact the development of
moral character are age and gender.

● Age. As we advance in age, we become exposed to various aspects and experiences in

the environment. Such events when experienced at a point of a critical period (age) in
our development tend to leave a mark that impacts our character and influences how we
perceive ourselves and our surroundings. For instance, a 5 - year old child who was
exposed to an environment of physical abuse, will view the world differently from a 15-
year old adolescent who was exposed to a similar environment of physical abuse. The
impact on the psyche is different especially when the person doing the abuse is the one
who is supposed to protect the child because the child is not yet capable of protecting
himself.

● Gender. Society considers gender (male/female or otherwise) an important factor in

determining social behavior. We are, therefore, expected to conduct ourselves according
to the roles of our gender. As such, males, females, and LGBTs should observe proper
behavior in accordance with the established social norms. Unfortunately, there are
marked differences in society’s expectations for males, females, and LGBTs. The
standards for each vary from culture to culture. Differences in gender roles and
expectations have led to cases of prejudice and discrimination. In these modern
times,there are still cultures that treat their women badly, bringing women down to the
level of objects rather than individuals who deserve the same respect and opportunities
as anybody else.

After the preceeding discussion, we can conclude that, our own view of morality is unique
because each of us are born with biological characteristics handed down to us by our parents;
unique because of the upbringing each of us had at a place and period in history which affected
us in a manner that is different from the others. These combinations of circumstances allow us
to create a version of our own moral character with a personal worldview on how we are to
morally live our lives (Boylan, 2000).

B. Moral Development
Moral development is a lifelong process through which we, humans acquire our beliefs,
attitudes and values with the goal of making us morally mature and enabling us to live
comfortably with others.

In the field of human behavior, several theories have been proposed on various aspects of
human development. An area of study that is in line with ethics is the theory that deals with the
development of morality. Lawrence Kohlberg (1984), was the psychologist who proposed the
theory of the Stages of Moral Development. According to Kohlberg, as people grow and
develop, they passed through a series of stages that would influence their sense of justice and
affect how they rationalize their moral judgements (Feldman, 2010).

Lawrence Kohlberg based his theory on the study that he conducted on children of different
ages. He contended that moral values are acquired as the child evolves through the stages
together with the development of his ability to think and reason (Coon, 2001).

He believed that correct moral reasoning was the key factor in moral decision making. In his
study, Kohlberg presented the children with different moral dilemmas. Each child was asked
what action should be taken in each one. He then classified the reasons given for the choices
and came up with the three levels of moral development. A classic example of one of the
dilemmas he used is the Heinz Dilemma:

A woman was on her deathbed. There was one drug that the doctors
thought might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist in the
same town had recently discovered. The drug was expensive to make,
but the druggist was charging ten times what the drug cost him to
produce. He paid $200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small
dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband, Heinz, went to everyone he
knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about $1,000
which is half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying
and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said:
“No, I discovered the drug and I'm going to make money from it.” Heinz got desperate and broke into
the man's laboratory to steal the drug for his wife. Should Heinz have broken into the laboratory to steal
the drug for his wife? Why or why not?

Lawrence Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development

After the conduct of the study on the children, Kohlberg, who was inspired by the study done
by Jean Piaget (a Swiss Psychologist) on Cognitive Development developed the theory on the
Stages of Moral Development. His theory showed that moral development has three levels:
preconventional, conventional and post conventional. The levels are not based on the choices
of actions to be taken but the reasons that are given by the child for the choice (Coon, 2001).
Each level has two stages, so, there are six stages in all. Below is a brief discussion of the
moral levels and the stages within each level. The Heinz Dilemma will be used as the example
for explaining the different moral stages.
● The Preconventional Level. In this level, the moral choice is based on the
possible consequences of the behavior. Consequences may range from rewards,
punishment or as result of favors. Within this level are the first and second stages
of moral development.

Stage 1: Punishment Orientation. The reasons for the choice of behavior given are
based on the possibility of punishment. Obedience to authority is needed to avoid being
punished. The goodness or badness of the action is overlooked. For example:

*Heinz should not steal the drug because when he is caught, he would be sent to jail.

Stage 2: Pleasure-seeking Orientation. The reasons for the choice of behavior are
based on one’s own needs or self-interest and disregards the important virtues of loyalty,
gratitude or justice. For example:

*Stealing the drug won’t do Heinz much good because his wife will probably die before
he gets out of jail.

● The Conventional Level. In this level, reasons for the choices of behavior are
based on the desire to please others or to conform to rules and accepted social
values. Within this level are the third and fourth stages of moral development.

Stage 3: Good Boy/Good Girl Orientation. The reasons for the choice of behavior
emphasize being “nice”. The basis for good behavior is its capacity to please others,
thereby, acquiring the approval of the group. For example:

*Heinz should not steal the drug, because people will think that he is a thief and his wife
would not approve of stealing to save her life.

Stage 4: Authority Orientation. The reason for the choice of behavior is to uphold the
law, do one’s duty and follow social rules.

*Although Heinz wife need the drug, he should not steal it because stealing is a crime
and Heinz is breaking the law. The end does not justify the means.
 ● The Post-Conventional Level. The reasons for the choice of behavior is based on
self-accepted moral principles. The last two stages fall under this highest level of
moral development.

Stage 5: Social Contract Orientation. The reasons for the choice of behavior is based
on personal moral standards and acceptance of rules. In this stage, however, there is
possibility that some rules may be questioned for in some cases the rules may be wrong.
When rules conflict with the person’s sense of personal justice, they are usually ignored.
But, there also is realization that rules are good for maintaining order in the community
because of generally accepted values. For example:

*Heinz should not steal the drug. Though the druggist’s decision is selfish, mutual
respect for each other’s rights should be maintained.

Stage 6: Morality of Individual Principles. This is the highest stage of Kohlberg’s moral
development. The reasons for the choice of behavior is guided by self-chosen universal
ethical principles. The person strongly values justice, dignity and equality and integrates
these into his understanding of morality which to him are more important than the laws of
the land. For example:

*Heinz should steal the drug, give it to his wife then surrender to authority. He will be
penalized but he will save his wife.

Individual differences suggest that people advance through the stages of moral development
at different rates. Many fail to reach the post-conventional level while others cannot even reach
the second level. For example, in a survey conducted in a certain country, it was revealed that
11% of men and 3% of women would commit murder for $ 1million if they can be sure that they
can get away with the crime (Coon, 2001). How then can we be sure that we, together with our
future children develop a kind of morality that will go beyond selfish intentions and prove our
worth as beings of dignity?

C. Conscience-Based Moral Decisions

According to the dictionary definition, conscience is the part of the mind that makes us aware
of our actions as being morally right or wrong. It is the sense of awareness we have of the
moral goodness or wrongness of our conduct, intention, or character together with a feeling of
obligation to do what is right or to be good (Merriam & Webster). These definitions tell us that
conscience is something that is within us. It is like an “inner voice” that tells us that what we did
is good or makes us feel guilty because we did wrong and we failed to do what we ought to do.

Is conscience hereditary, biological, or acquired? Much of the researches on human

behavior suggest that conscience is a product of learning. Learning, in the field of human
behavior is defined as permanent changes in behavior or behavior potential that is brought
about by repeated practice or exposure to the situation (Ciccarelli & Meyer, 2006). Since
conscience is acquired, it is important that learning begins early in the developmental stages by
responsible adults in the environment of the home. The institution of the family, still is the social
institution that will mold and form the moral character of individuals. It is the responsibility of the
parents, especially, the child’s mother to make sure that the child acquires a moral compass that
would make him a good person and a blessing to the society.

“The hand that rocks the cradle, is the hand that rules the world” (Wallace, 1865) is a poem
that bears testimony to the strength of the mother in honing the moral character of the child and
their impact in determining the child’s moral decisions. The significant role of the father in the
family is to love the mother and provide the emotional and physical needs of his family.

Since mothers are the first teachers, her own moral compass should initially point to the
direction of goodness. Michael Elgersma (2013), gave a list of what parents, particularly
mothers can do for their children to develop a good, strong moral character:

● Create an environment, particularly in the home that promotes virtues of compassion,

courtesy, cooperation, responsibility, fairness, tolerance, self-control, courage,
knowledge, perseverance, honesty and respect for oneself and others, to name some.
Given below are the definitions of the virtues mentioned:

Compassion Being sympathetic of other’s distress together with a desire to

help to “lighten” the burden.

Courtesy Exhibiting polite behavior that shows respect for other people.

Cooperation Being part of a situation in which people work together to do

something good or beneficial.

Responsibility Performing a duty or task that one is required or expected to

do.

Fairness Agreeing with what is thought to be right or acceptable.

Tolerance Willingness to accept feelings, habits, or beliefs that are

different from one’s own.

Self-control Having restraint over one’s own impulses, emotions or

desires.

Courage Doing something that one knows is difficult or dangerous.

Knowledge Awareness of something: an information, understanding or

skill that one gets from experience or education.

Honesty Manifesting the quality of being fair or truthful.

Respectfulness Admiring someone or something that is good, valuable or

important.
● Model these virtues. Learning the virtues results from repeated exposure and practice.
The parents and other adults in the environment should model the virtues for the child to
consistently see and feel them.

● Use day-to-day experiences as learning opportunities. Parents do not have to set

artificial situations for the learning to take place. The small things or events that happen
every day can be opportunities for learning.

● Present opportunities to develop decision making skills that deals with good moral
judgments. Example:

*Ask the child why he thinks it is important to put his toys back in the box after he plays
with them.

● Involve children in making house rules with appropriate consequences for obedience or
disobedience. Example:

* Rule: Share toys with your sister/brother.

Consequence: Obedience will result in happier playtime.
Disobedience will result in zero playtime for the day.

● Present opportunities to decide on solutions to problems or disputes. Example:

*Kuya likes mom to buy him chocolate ice cream but little sister wanted strawberry ice
cream. But Mom has money for only one flavor of ice cream. Present the situation to
the children and see how they will decide.

● Demonstrate humility and acknowledge mistakes. The child should be made to realize
that parents are people too. They can make mistakes; get angry, sad, sick, and
frustrated. Parents should be humble enough to admit their mistakes and learn from
them. The child should be aware of this so that together as a team they can help each
other achieve moral goodness.

● Talk about feelings. To have honesty as a virtue means that we can express our feelings
for us to be understood and not be afraid that we will be judged badly. Everybody goes
through rough times at some points in their lives and family members needs to be
perceptive and sensitive enough to realize that there are times when we need to give a
loved one “some space.”

● Monitor exposure to media. The care and moral training given by parents can be
overridden by media which includes social media. The child should be monitored as he
accesses and surfs the net. Values can change and efforts of the parents in molding the
child can be wasted by the power and the allure of cyber technology.
 ● Above all, give unconditional love. There will be mistakes made by parents and children.
They should be made aware that they matter, more than the objects or rules that they
break. That saying “sorry” means that they have learned and that the mistakes made
them better persons.

The ability to make conscience-based decisions is strongly influenced by the moral

environment of the family. Values are acquired based on the virtues emulated by parents and
by other adults which provide the child with a good basis for his moral compass. The media,
should be closely monitored for its tendency to make or break moral character.

Sources: Letran Ethics Manual

Gazzingan, L. et.al. (2018) Ethics. Muntinlupa City: Panday-Lahi Publishing House.