MODULE 2

Human Person as Moral Agent

Learning Objectives
At the end of this chapter, the learners are expected to:
1. define the human person,
2. explain the different attributes of the human person,
3. compare and contrast “actus hominis” and “actus humanus,” and
4. assess the human person as a moral agent.

Thales, an ancient philosopher from the ancient Greek City of Miletus (now
Turkey), claims that the most difficult thing to do in life is to know oneself. Why? As
what Avery Dulles (1918 – 2008 A.D.), a Jesuit professor in contemporary ethics and a
Catholic Theologian once says, in effect, the human person is full of mystery. A
mystery is an occurrence or a being that is difficult to comprehend because it has no
clear explanation. Like the origin of the human world or person. But the human person
is moved by this mystery the yearning to know, explore and understand himself or
herself.
Necessary Elements of a Moral Agent

The human person according to Karl Rahner (1904 – 1984

A.D.), another influential Jesuit priest and theologian of the 20 th
century, is a union of body and soul. The body is the visible
realities in a person like the eyes or limbs, while the soul is the
spiritual part, the invisible part, like the mind. They are not the
same but always together. Separate them then the person will
cease to exist. Although the term ‘soul’ is purely conceptual,
nonetheless, two great western philosophers, Aristotle (384 -322 B.C.) and Aquiñas
(1225 – 1274 A.D.), claim that the soul is really existing, and the one that animates the
body. Aristotle even adds that the body becomes the extension of the soul, that is,
through the body the soul is being expressed or even felt. In this sense, the body
becomes the door where the soul interacts or communicates with the physical world.
Whereas, Aquiñas states, that the place of the soul is in the human mind. That’s the
reason why the human mind has the functions of:
1. seeking the truth due to his or her capacity to reason out, and
2. choosing the good due to his or her free will.

A. Thinking Being

The human person is a thinking being. This is obvious to everybody. This

attribute makes the person different from other beings. It is a power bestowed to
everybody to figure out problems, discover laws within nature, improve one’s life as
human beings, form and articulate language, express emotions and dream dreams. It is
a power that assists a person to communicate, feel and progress.
B. Free Being

All social scientists admit that a person, as a rational being, does have a certain
amount of freedom, which enable him or her to choose. This ability is known as free
will. It is the faculty of the human mind that enables the person, to choose among many
options, most especially to choose between good and evil. Without the person’s free
will, it is impossible for him or her to decide and do what is right and avoid what is
wrong. However, freedom is limited and not absolute. In fact, a famous 20 th century
behavioral psychologist and empiricist (a person who believes that real things are
tangible, thus concepts are not real) Frederic Skinner (1904 – 1990 A.D.), says, freedom
is an illusion. In other words, it is not true that a person is free, it is just a concept in the
mind, it is not tangible. All things that are not tangible for Skinner do not exist.

Some people believe that human person’s freedom is limited because of the
following reasons:

1. Human person is an embodied spirit. Meaning the person is both matter and
spirit. Matter exists within the boundary of time and space unlike the spirit. In
simple words, a person lives only for a specific time and in a certain location. No
person can live in this world eternally. He or she is not permanent in this world.
Thus, a person dies at a certain point in time. Besides, no person can be in the
same place at same time.
2. Human person is restricted by his or her behavior. Psychology is the science of
human behavior and the study of the human mind. Let us talk about human
behavior. Human behavior can either be physical or emotional. Behaviors are
any actions or mannerism of a person as a response to his or her own feelings,
other persons’ behaviors and environment. Example of a physical behavior is
talking at full volume. Nobody is restricted from talking loudly except, for
example, when you are in the library. Because the person may disturb the people
quietly studying there. To get angry is an emotional behavior. Anybody has the
right to express his or her anger to anybody, as long as, it does not result to
violence, such as hitting the face of another person. From the examples, human
person is not totally free to do what he or she likes to do in all situations.

3. The person’s present concrete situation. There are times, when a person’s
present situation restricts him or her to do something he or she likes. For
example, a person wants to be a valedictorian in the class, but he or she is lazy to
study, so it is impossible for him or her to get high grades.

4. Due to a person’s habits. Habits are things a person repeatedly do. Sometimes
harmful, sometimes not. Nonetheless, habits affect greatly the person’s choices.
Like in smoking, if the person is addicted to it, his or her desire to quit will be
hampered.

5. Due to the person’s motivations. There are many reasons why a person do
something, such as smoking, maybe because of curiosity or stress. The person’s
motivations restrict him or her to choose freely and clearly.

6. The concept of predestination. Predestination is a religious teaching that

everything happens to a person is caused by a powerful force outside himself or
herself. There are forces outside the person that guide his or her direction in life.
Forces that influence him or her to act or not to act on a certain situation, such as
 the person’s belief that all occurrences in his or her life are fixed and designed by
a Supreme Being. This influence the person’s ability to choose freely.

Human Person is Free

Human person is free. For Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712 – 1778 A.D.), an 18 th
century Swiss-born rationalist philosopher (a rationalist is a person who believes that
reason alone is the source of knowledge). He says, that human freedom refers to the
ability of human beings to act differently and do anything they want. For Thomas
Hobbes (1588 – 1679 A.D.), an English materialist philosopher (a materialist is a person
who believes that everything is made of matter and everything that happens in this
world is caused by the interactions of matters), freedom is an act based on self interest.
Thomas Aquinas (1225 – 1274 A.D.), the angelic doctor of the Catholic church, defines
freedom as an act based on the person’s ability to decide for himself and make a choice.

In modern times, human person is considered free because of the following reasons:

1. The person’s openness to the possibility that anything can happen to him or her
everyday, the so called “aha” experience. The truth is, nobody knows what will
happen to him or her the next day. Yet, he or she is free to accept or ignore that
reality.

2. Due to human person’s experience of responsibility. Any person experiences

that in everything he or she has willingly done, in words or in deeds, it always
entails responsibility. Responsibility in simple terms, is a person’s obligation to
do the things that he or she is supposed to do, and accept the consequences of his
 or her actions. In such case, the person chooses to be or not to be a responsible
person.

3. Due to immediate experience of making decision or choice. Sometimes there are

people who say, “I don’t like to choose or decide” or “I can’t make a choice or
decision.” No one can escape from making a choice or decision. Everybody
chooses or decides. Not to choose is a “choice,” not to decide is a decision.

4. Due to rewards and punishment. Many times a person may notice, if he or she
does good things, he or she receives a reward. If he or she does bad things, he
receives a punishment. So, the person chooses between doing good or bad,
because of reward and punishment he or she will get. Thus freedom determines
or shapes the person’s life.

The Human Person as Moral Agent

You are offered a 10,500 pesos bike or bicycle for 1000 pesos only. You know it is
stolen, but you are badly in need of a bike since you want to be on time always in school
, and the bike is a big help to attain your daily goal, moreover the bike is so cheap. What
will you do? State your reason. How do you arrive at your decision?

A tract on human acts is necessary, but it does not lead to the thought that
morality is only a matter of actions, as if, because of the trees one will miss the forest.
The person is more than the sum of his actions. In truth, more than an embodied spirit,
with the ability to reason out and make a choice, the person is also a social being. A
being that interacts with other beings including his or her environment. It is his or her
very nature. From infanthood to adulthood, the person never miss to interact. During
his or her infanthood, if he or she needs milk or food, he or she interacts with his or her
mother to survive. During adult life, if the person needs food to grow, and be healthy
and productive, he or she interacts with other beings like the animals and plants. If he
or she needs to learn from experiences, the person interacts with fellow human beings.
If human person is isolated from all other beings, he will not survive. However, if other
beings influence the life of one person, he or she influences also other beings in this
world, either good or bad. Thus the person is more than his brain, freedom, body and
spirit. The human person is also a social being. He either affects or be affected by others
in society. For this reason, the person must assess first his or her action or behavior in
society, if it is appropriate or inappropriate; good or bad; right or wrong.

The capacity of the human person to discern what is ‘good and bad,’ ‘right or
wrong,’ ‘appropriate or inappropriate,’ and be responsible for one’s actions or
behaviors are the basis for which human person is called a moral agent.

All actions of the human person can be called “human acts.” But the concept here
is restricted to those actions that proceed from reason and freewill. Acts for which the
human person is responsible.

In Christian ethics, under the influence of Thomas Aquinas, there are two types
of actions which are being tackled, they are the “act of man or actus hominis” and the
“human act or actus humanus”.

“Actus Humanus” refers to human actions that one does consciously and wilfully
or deliberately. So, it suggests that the human person is consciously and wilfully
performing the act. Nobody forces the person to act. He or she alone does the action
with all his or her knowledge and with full freedom. Thus the person is morally liable
or accountable for her own actions, because it is resulted from his own discretion or
choice. For this reason, the action has a moral significance. Like looking lustfully to a
woman or killing intentionally a person.
 
Under this type of action comes a more complex act known as “forced act.”A
“forced act” is an action which is not wilfully or deliberately committed by the actor
itself. A third party compels the person to act against his or her will or desire. Like
Shotgun marriage, the groom is coerced to marry the bride. Another example is when a
male teacher forces his female student to have sex with him in exchange of a passing
grade.

On the contrary, “actus hominis” or the “act of man” is an involuntary action of

the person, thus it is regarded as “amoral” or “neutral”. It is not “willed” nor “desired.”
It is not “yearned” nor “prayed for” to happen. It just happens to us from “dusk to
dawn” spontaneously or instantaneously. Thus it entails no responsibility or
accountability on the part of the one carrying out the action. It means, that the person is
not responsible for his or her action. In simple words, the action is neither ethical (an
action which conform to standards) or unethical (an action which does not conform to
standards). For example, in the mastication of the food inside our stomach, we don’t
need to command our stomach to act neither willed it to happen, since it will act by
itself. Other examples are “somnambulism” or walking while sleeping, which is a
behavior disorder; or growing fingernails or hair. Thus these actions are things that
happens to a human person involuntarily or not deliberately. But, mind you, there are
“actus hominis” that becomes human acts when they are intentionally used, such as,
using the sense of sight when a man is looking at a woman lustfully. 

However, modern ethicist will not just center on human actions as the main
culprit in the spread of “good and evil” in this world, but on human behaviors (i.e. the
way one conduct itself) and human nature (i.e. what a human person in itself).

Thus the question, “are you going to take the stolen bicycle?” Is a question of
“can you discern what is ‘good’ and what is ‘bad?”

Human persons as Moral agents have a moral responsibility not to initiate or

start groundless harm to other people, to society and environment (Haring, 1978). With
an exception, children as well as adults with mental disabilities, are not considered
moral agents. Moreover, adults with full mental capacity are not held full responsibility
for their actions in extreme circumstances, like if the adult is being held hostage or
being forced to act against his or her will, like the one mentioned above, a “shotgun
marriage.” Thus, only people who can intentionally, consciously or deliberately do
good things to others or harm others are responsible or accountable for their behavior
or actions.

Hence, we can also ask, do commercial and industrial establishments have moral
agency? As humanoids with artificial intelligence progresses in the field of robotic
technology, do they have moral agency? How about dogs, dolphins and monkeys, do
they have moral agency, in fact, there are socially intelligent animals.

Ethicists today are facing more and more challenging questions that need a lucid
and precise solution in the coming years. And they will need to mull over moral agency
as it applies to these circumstances.

Everyone is called to be a good person and ‘bringer’ of goodness spontaneously

and constantly to everybody in society. Of course, it is not an easy task. And not just to
obeying and following stiff rules and regulations. Thus ‘good’ behaviors must become a
habit to everybody.

Summary

The human person as an embodied spirit is composed of body and soul, different
entities, yet united and undivided. One is material, the other is immaterial. Remove one
from the other and the person dies. Thomas Aquinas says that the place of the soul is
the mind. The functions of the mind is to reason out and to choose, that makes the
person a thinking and free being. As a thinking and free being, the person is capable of
choosing an action or behavior, consciously and willingly. This makes a person a moral
agent, somebody who can discern and choose an action and be responsible to it.