UNIT 2:

THE MORAL AGENT

 Learning Outcomes:
At the end of this learning episode, you should be able to:
• explain what moral agent means;
• discuss the meaning of the fundamental option;
• state defining moments in your moral formation;
• explain the relationship between moral acts and character;
• describe each stage of moral development; and
• evaluate one’s personality growth against the stages of personal
development.
 LESSON 1:
Man as a Moral Agent
The Human Person as a Moral Agent
• Moral
 It comes from the Latin “mores,” referring to society’s patterns,
standards, and rules of doing things.
• Agent
 Comes from the Latin word “agere,” to do, act.
 A moral agent is one who performs an act in accordance with moral
standards.
 A moral agent is the moral actor, the one who acts morally.
The Human Person as a Moral Agent
• Moral Agent
 A moral agent is “a being who is capable of those actions that have
moral quality and which can be properly dominated good or evil in a
moral sense.”
 Only a moral agent is capable of human acts.
-“Morality is for persons.”
 A moral agent should have the capacity to rise above their feelings
and passions and act for the sake of the moral law.
The Human Person as a Moral Agent
Question: What is a sufficient condition for the moral agency?
• Capacity to conform to moral standards, to act for the sake of moral
considerations, that is, for the sake of moral law, qualifies one to be a
moral agent.
• The absence of that capacity to conform to moral standards, as in
the case of an insane person, excludes you from a moral agency.
• A dog is not, therefore, a moral agent because it doesn’t have the
capacity to conform to moral standards.
The Purpose-Driven Moral Agent
Where do you go (quo vadis), moral agent?
For this old question, we find an old answer from the textbook written
by Rev. Charles Collens, S.J. It is based on the principles laid down by St.
Thomas Aquinas. “Every human act is directed toward an end”. An end
may be pursued merely as a means to another end, that is, merely an
instrumental end.
As Aristotle put it, that end which is sought for its own sake, that is, it
is no longer sought for the sake of another end, is the summon bonum, the
highest good. That highest good is happiness.
For St. Thomas, the highest good or end is happiness but the absolutely
final end is God.
The Human Person as a Moral Agent
Three Thomistic principles regarding the end or purpose of the moral
agent:
1. Every agent that performs an action acts for the sake of the end or
purpose to be attained.
2. Every agent acts for an ultimate end.
3. Every agent has the power of moving for an end which is suitable or
good for him.
• From a Christian point of view, a human person’s destiny in the world is
not only to achieve cultural and moral perfection, but to attain the
eternal happiness of the soul after death of the body.
The Fundamental Option
• The road of life may have many diversions. Hence, the decision and
choice to take one way, like Robert Frost’s “one less traveled by”,
one that proceeds to the end expected of men, the determination to
abide by such end, is referred to as adapting the “fundamental option,”
a free choice to say “yes”, like a “yes” to God, an affirmative response
to God’s invitation to follow His way.
• Fundamental option is a human person’s basic choice or inner
orientation either for a good life (directed towards others and gods) or
for a bad life (directed towards himself/herself) and cut off from others
and God.
No Pre-Fixed Plan for Man
• According to some 20th-century thinkers there are no pre-existing
directions. “There are no signs in the heavens.” there are no pre-designed,
pre-fixed design, plan, or purpose of man’s being.
• Jean Paul Sartre (an existentialist) – a human person is or becomes what
he/she makes of himself /herself by choice. He/she is nothing, on
“essence”, until he/she starts his/her “existence” by making choices.
• Teilhard de Chardin (1948) and Alfred North Whitehead (1996)
(process philosophers) – whatever a human person is or will be a result of a
creative process.
• In other words, for all these thinkers human person has to create his or her
end, purpose, or direction.
No Pre-Fixed Plan for Man
• Martin Heidegger, Gabriel Marcel, and Martin Buber see themselves
as being-with-others, inseparably related to their fellow man. By placing
their biases and prejudices between brackets, that is, by suspending their
vision, they realize who the other being is in their presence.

• The other is saying, “Let us learn to live together to affirm each other’s
being. Together we go through life, designing our ends and purposes,
guided by messages unveiled in a life of dialogue with ourselves, with
other selves, and with the world.
No Pre-Fixed Plan for Man

• Consequently, the end purpose, or direction of beings-with-others, is what

they discover, as they learn to live together. Says Buber, (1957) “All real
living meeting”, a life of dialogue.
• A human person has to create his/her end, purpose, or directions. He/she
has to invent his/her destiny. Since there is no goal or end designed for
him/her, he/she would completely be the author of what he/she turns out
to be. He/she will be totally responsible for what he/she will be.
“World to Come” Means “World to Come Out of this World
• Fr. Rene de Branbander, CICM, former professor in St. Louis University,
Baguio City, wrote an article entitled, “Christianity in the Modern
World.”
• The modern Christian departs from the view that earthly life, the world of
flesh, is a sinful thing that has to be abandoned for the sake of heavenly
life. “But heaven and earth are one and the same thing you cannot love
one and despise the other.”
• The world to come, that is, the heavenly world that every Christian desires
to direct their life to, can only come out or immerged from this world of
flesh.
“World to Come” Means “World to Come Out of this World
• A person should direct his or her life toward this end, the making of the
world to come out of this world.
• Instead of avoiding “this world” as a sinful world of flesh, we involve
ourselves in it, improving it, refining it, constructing and developing it,
and perfecting it to bring out the world to come.
• The modern saint is out there fighting for justice building schools and
hospitals, clothing the naked, and feeding the hungry, instead of spending
most of his time in contemplation (Brabander, 1970).
“World to Come” Means “World to Come Out of this World
• In Robert Francoeur’s Perspective of Evolution, the future world toward
which a person should direct his/her life is this same material world but
spiritualized, that is, material world’s spiritualized, a world devoid of its
material limitations, a world liberated and freed from its spatio-temporal
conditions.
• To contribute to the making of this future world the human person has to
participate through his/her creative acts of unifying, ordering synthesizing
things.
 LESSON 2:
The Development of
Moral Character of
the Moral Agent
Meaning of Defining Moment
• Defining moment refers to a significant life-changing event or moment
that reverberates throughout your career and personal life and so changes
everything.
 St. Paul’s defining moment was when suddenly a light from heaven
flashed around him on his way through Damascus. When he and his
men were very near the city, they were suddenly surrounded by a light
so bright that it knocked Saul to the ground.
 St. Augustine’s defining moment was when while outdoors he heard
the voice of a child singing a song, the words of which were “ Pick it
up and read it. Pick it up and read it.”
Relationship Between Moral Acts and Character
• Moral character is necessary for moral behavior.
• Moral character facilitates doing the moral action.
• A person who has moral character does moral actions more readily and
more willingly than one who does not. Therefore, it is good to develop
moral character.
• It is, therefore, best for all persons to develop moral character. Moral
character is formed by repeatedly doing moral acts.
 LESSON 3:
The Stages of Moral
Development
Moral Development
• Moral development refers to the process through which a human person
gains his/her beliefs, skills, and dispositions that make him/her a morally
mature person.
• Just as the pattern of intellectual growth can be simply described as
passing through stages of animal behavior, pre-logical thinking, thought
governed by empirical logic, and finally by formal logic, so morality can
be described as passing through stages of behavior controlled first, by
taboo; then second, by law; third by conscience (i.e. irrational, intrajected
values); fourth, by reciprocity; fifth, by social consensus and finally by
personal moral principles, though not necessarily in that order.
Moral Development
• Stated differently, the five stages may be reduced to three as follows:
1. The amoral stage – egocentric, hedonist and prudential
considerations.
2. The pre-moral stage – authoritarian, ego-idealist, social and
reciprocal considerations.
3. The moral stage – personal, autonomous, altruistic, rational,
independent and reversible considerations.
Kohlberg’s Stages of Moral Development
• Moral development refers to the process through which a human person,
gains his or her beliefs, skills and dispositions that make him/her a
morally mature person”.
• Kohlberg (2013) describes the stages of moral development in three (3)
stages, namely: Level 1 – Pre-conventional morality, Level 2 –
Conventional morality, and Level 3 – Post-Conventional morality.
Level 1 – Pre-conventional morality
• This is the lowest level of moral development in Kohlberg’s theory.
• At the pre-conventional level children don’t have a personal code of
morality. Instead, their moral code is controlled by the standards of adults
and the consequences of following or breaking adult’s rules.
• Authority is outside the individual and reasoning is based on the physical
consequences of actions. There is no internalization of moral values.
Level 1 – Pre-conventional morality
• Stage 1. Obedience and Punishment Orientation.
 The child/individual that’s good in order to avoid being punished. If
he/she is punished, he/she must have done wrong.
 Children obey because adults tell them to obey. Moral decisions are
based on fear of punishment. It is a matter of obey or you get
punished.
 E.g. Josef does not cheat because he is afraid of a punishment, a failing
grade and “I go to school because I am afraid to be dropped and fail.”
Level 1 – Pre-conventional morality
• Stage 2. Instrumental Orientation
 Right behavior is defined by whatever the individual believes to be in
his/her best interest.
 In this stage there is limited interest in the needs of others, only to the
point where it might further the individual’s own interests.
 It is a matter of “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours” mentality.
 E.g. when a child is asked by his parents to do each chore. The child
asks “what’s in it for me?” and the parents offered the child a reward
by giving him a treat.
Level 2 – Conventional
• Throughout the conventional level, a child’s sense of morality is tied to
personal and societal relationships.
• Children continue to accept the rules of authority figures, but this is
shown now due to their belief that this is necessary to ensure positive
relationships and societal order.
• Adherence to rules and conventions is somewhat rigid during these stages
and are rule’s appropriateness or fairness is seldom questioned.
Level 2 – Conventional
• Stage 3. “Good Boy, Nice Girl” Orientation
 In this stage, children want the approval of others and act in ways to
avoid disapproval. Emphasis is placed on good behavior and people
being “nice” to others.
 The individual is good in order to be seen as being a good person by
others. Therefore, answers relate to the approval of others.
 The individual values caring the loyalty to others as a basis for moral
judgments.
 E.g. if a politician is around in times of calamities primarily because he
wants to appear “good boy” or “good girl” to electorates.
Level 2 – Conventional

• Stage 4. Law and Order Orientation

 The child/individual becomes aware of the wider rules of society, so
judgments concern obeying the rules in order to uphold the law and
to avoid guilt.
 It is a matter of “I have to do this because the law says so.” it is still
blind obedience to the law so morality still lacks internalization.
 E.g. it is the right thing to do; “school rules say so” ask reasons for
going to school.
Level 3 – Post-conventional morality
• This is the level of full internalization.
• Morality is completely internalized and not based on external standards.
• Individual judgment is based on self-chosen principles and moral
reasoning is based on individual rights and justice.
• According to Kohlberg this level of moral reasoning is far as most people
get.
Level 3 – Post-conventional morality
• Stage 5. Social Contract Orientation
 The child/individual becomes aware that while rules/laws might exist
for the good of the greatest number, there are times when they will
work against the interest of particular individuals.
 In this level, individuals reason out what values, rights, and principles
transcend the law.
 Laws are regarded as social contracts rather than rigid orders.
Those that do not promote the general welfare should be changed when
necessary to meet the greatest good for the greatest number of people.
Level 3 – Post-conventional morality
• Stage 6. Universal, Ethical, Principle Orientation
 Individuals at this stage have developed their own set of moral
guidelines which may or may not fit the law. They have developed
moral judgments that are based on universal human rights.
 The principles apply to everyone.
 E.g. Human rights, justice, and equality. The person will be prepared
to act to defend these principles even if it means going against the rest
of society in the process and having to pay the consequences of
disapproval and/or imprisonment. When faced with a dilemma
between law and conscience, the person follows his conscience.
 Development of Conscience-Based Moral Decision
• Moral development includes the development of conscience-based moral
decisions.
• Panizo defines conscience as “an act of the practical judgment of reason
deciding upon an individual action as good and to be performed and as evil
and to be avoided.”
• It is metaphorically referred to as the “inner or little voice of God.”
• Panizo (1964) quoted St. Tomas regarding the obligatory force of
conscience: “Every conscience, whether right or erroneous, whether with
regard to acts which are evil in themselves or acts which are indifferent, is
obligatory, so that he who acts in position to his conscience, does wrong.”
 The Formation of Conscience
• Conscience formation begins with the deep-seated decision to seek moral
truth. It must stand on the firm foundation of integrity, sincerity, and
forthrightness and must be sustained by the habit of consistently educating
oneself by exposure to objective moral norms and the rationale behind those
norms.
• For conscience to be formed, it needs a guide, for Christians, Church’s moral
teaching in persons whose moral judgments are sound and in accordance
with the Church’s moral tradition.
• Conscience formation requires a habit of ongoing self-formation (moral
information gathering) through study, reading, and other types of inquiry.
 The Formation of Conscience
• Conscience-based moral decision means the widening of human
consciousness – from family consciousness to plan consciousness,
community consciousness, town consciousness, provincial, regional,
national, and international or global consciousness.
• As one’s consciousness widens, the standards of one’s decision-making
widen, and one’s moral conscience widens, one matures.
• Moral development is internalization of moral norms. One acts morally
based on his/her convictions not because the law says so or a person in
authority orders so.