1. To be a moral agent, one must be capable of reasoning about right and wrong, adhering to moral standards, and being responsible for one's actions. Not all humans have this level of moral agency. 2. Examples of those generally not considered capable of moral agency are babies, young children, and those with significant mental disabilities that impact reasoning. 3. True human freedom involves balancing one's circumstances in life with pursuing one's ideals, as one's identity is shaped by both external factors and one's own choices over time.

1. E T H I C S - M O R A L P H I L O S O P H Y
THE MORAL
AGENT

2. FIRST, WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE A
PERSON?

3. A PERSON IS…
Open and Relational: No man is an island; we grow into our full selves
as persons only in relating to others. We realize that being a person
means being by others (our conception, birth, upbringing), being with
others (our family, friends, neighbors, business associates), and being
for others (love, service).
Conscious Beings: We are aware of ourselves in our outgoing acts. We
possess this self-awareness through our knowing and free willing.

4. Embodied Spirits: This stresses the unity between our “body
and soul.” Our bodies are an essential part of our being
human, not merely an “instrument” we “use” according to our
whims.
Historical Realities: We are pilgrims on-the-way, who gradually,
through time, become our full selves. In exercising freedom,
we decide for ourselves and form ourselves; in this sense we
are our own cause. We develop as persons in discernible
stages, described in great detail by modern psychology.

5. Unique yet Fundamentally Equal: Despite physical differences as
well as differing intellectual and moral powers, we instinctively
realize that as persons, in some basic way, we are all equal.
Meanwhile, Bulaong et. al. (2018) asserts that the one who is
tasked to think about what is “right” and why is it so, and to choose
to do so, is a human individual. Who is this individual who must
engage herself in ethical thought and decision-making? Who one
is, in the most fundamental sense, is another major topic in the act
of philosophizing. The ancient Greeks even had a famous saying for
it: “Epimeleia he auto”, usually translated into English as “Know
thyself.”

6. In response to this age-old Filipino Philosopher Ramon C.
Reyes (1935-2014), writing in his essay “Man and Historical
Action,” succinctly explained that “Who one is” is a cross-point.
By this, he means that one’s identity, who one is or who I am,
is a product of many forces and events that happened outside
of one’s choosing. Reyes (2005) identifies four cross-points:
the physical, the interpersonal, the social, and the historical.

7. CROSS-POINTS ACCORDING TO REYES:
1. Physical cross-point
“Who one is”, firstly, is a function of physical events in the past
and material factors in the present that one did not have a choice in.
You are a member of the species Homo sapiens and therefore possess
the capacities and limitations endemic to human beings everywhere.
You inherited the genetic material of both your biological parents. Your
body has been shaped and continues to be conditioned by the given
set of environmental factors that are specific to your corner of the
globe.

8. 2. Interpersonal cross-point
An individual is also the product of an interpersonal
cross-point of many events and factors outside of one’s
choosing. One did not choose her own parents, and yet her
personality, character traits, and her overall way of doing
things and thinking about things have all been shaped by the
character of her parents and how they brought her up. All of
these, are also affected by the people surrounding her:
siblings, relatives, classmates, playmates, and eventually
workmates. Thus, who one is, in the sense of one’s character
or personality has been shaped by one’s relationships as well
as the physical factors that affect how one thinks and feels.2.

9. 3. Societal cross-point
A third cross-point for Reyes is the Societal; “who one is”
is shaped by one’s society. The term “society” here pertains to
all the elements of human groups as opposed to the natural
environment, that one is a member of “Culture” in its varied
aspects is included here. Reyes argues that “who one is” is
molded in large part by the kind of society and culture, which
for the most part, one did not choose, that one belongs to.
Filipinos have their own way of doing things, their own system
of beliefs and values, and even their own notions of right and
wrong. This third cross-point interacts with the physical and
the interpersonal factors that the individual and her people are
immersed into or engaged in.

10. 4. Historical cross-point
The fourth cross-point Reyes names is the historical,
which is simply the events that one’s people has undergone. In
short, one’s people’s history shapes “who one is” right now.
This interacts with the previous three. Each cross-point thus
crosses over into the others as well.

11. However, being a product of all this cross-points is just
one side of “who one is”. According to Reyes, “who one is” is
also a project for one’s self. This happens because a human
individual has freedom. This freedom is not absolute: one does
not become something because one chooses to be.
“WHO ONE IS” is a cross point. The meaning of one’s
existence is in the intersection between the fact that “one’s
being is a product of many forces outside her choosing” and
“her ideal future for herself”.

12. MORAL PERSONHOOD
Ayala (2010) asserts that humans have a moral sense because their
biological makeup determines the presence of three necessary
conditions for ethical behavior:
(i) the ability to anticipate the consequences of one’s own actions;
(ii) the ability to make value judgments; and
(iii) the ability to choose between alternative courses of action.

13. Moral persons are beings or entities having moral status or
standing (Evangelista and Mabaquiao, 2020). They are either moral
agents or moral patients. They are moral agents when they act as
sources of morally evaluable actions, in that they are the doers of such
actions. When one performs one’s moral duties or obligations, they are
moral agents. On the other hand, they are moral patients when
they act as the receivers of such actions, in that such actions are done to
them. For an instance, when a person’s rights are respected, they act as
moral patients. Evangelista and Mabaquiao (2020) reminds that all
moral persons are moral patients, but not all can be moral agents.

14. MORAL AGENCY
Moral agents are beings who are:
1) capable of reasoning, judging and acting with reference to right and
wrong;
2) expected to adhere to standards of morality for their actions; and
3) morally responsible for their actions and accountable for their
consequences (Brey, 2014). Moral agent must also be capable of
conforming to at least some of the demands of morality (Haksar,
1998)..

15. Haksar (1998) elaborates: “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.

16. 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.”

17. MORAL ACCOUNTABILITY
Moral accountability entails the deservingness of blame or
praise for the actions that we perform (Evangelista and Mabaquiao,
2020). Accountability is the readiness or preparedness to give an
explanation or justification to stakeholders for one’s judgments,
intentions and actions (Bellisario, n.d.) Accountability involves both
praise and blame (or reward and punishment). A person may deserve
to receive something and yet may not actually receive it.

18. Bellisario (n.d) elaborates: “It is a readiness to have one’s actions
judged by others and, where appropriate, accept responsibility for
errors, misjudgments and negligence and recognition for competence,
conscientiousness, excellence and wisdom.” While responsibility is
defined as a bundle of obligations associated with a role, accountability
could be defined as “blaming or crediting someone for an action”—
normally associated with a recognized responsibility. The accountable
actor is “held to external oversight, regulation, and mechanisms of
punishment aimed to externally motivate responsive adjustment in
order to maintain adherence with appropriate moral standards of
action.”

19. SYNTHESIS
1. Not all human beings are capable of becoming moral
agents. Moral agency requires that an agent (natural or juridical
person) are capable of conforming to at least some of the demands
of morality. As Philip Brey suggests, moral agents are beings that are
(1) capable of reasoning, judging and acting with reference to right
and wrong; (2) expected to adhere to standards of morality for their
actions; and (3) morally responsible for their actions and
accountable for their consequences. If we make the aforesaid
characteristics of a moral agent as our criteria for determining moral
agency, then any person who cannot meet these standards cannot
be considered as moral agents.

20. SYNTHESIS
2. Examples of persons not capable of moral agency
are babies, kids, and persons with mental disabilities
(generally caused by physical or psychological conditions).
This is perhaps the reason why our law provides that the
age of legal responsibility is 18 and treats insanity as an
exempting circumstance in criminal law. Of course, Ethics is
not equal to law. So as early as puberty and adolescence,
persons can already become moral agents.

21. SYNTHESIS
3. Human freedom by essence is not simply doing what you
want and getting what you wish to have without any restriction. In
the deepest sense of the word, it is striking the balance between
your “existential given-ness” (everything about you that is outside
your own choosing: your physical body, family, race, history,
limitations) and your ideal self (what you wish to become). In order
to become free, acceptance of who you are at the moment is the
first step. From that acknowledgement, you begin to work on
achieving the best person that you can be. Remember, you cannot
get everything that you ever wanted. But you bring out the best in
all the things that you have!