Talk:Moral agency

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

High

This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Ethics

Religion Low‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Misc. Errors

The sentence, "In Kant's philosophy, this calls for an act of faith, the faith free agent is based on something a priori, yet to be known, or immaterial", seems to have an error. Is the sentence saying that we need to have faith in order to accept the following statement? Or is it saying that our free agency requires an act of faith? Something seems grammatically wrong with this sentence - I don't know what the verb is in this sentence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.55.245.99 (talk) 08:07, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Section on nonhuman animal moral agency

It would be good to include a section on this topic; here's a few sources:

I've added a section, including these sources - thanks! Wreer806 (talk) 19:39, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article introduction

I think the first sentence needs adjusting. It currently reads 'Moral agency is an individual's ability to make moral judgments based on some notion of right and wrong and to be held accountable for these actions'.

1: It conflates moral judgment and agency. They are related, but not the same. Importantly, this article discusses or links to cases in which an entity could be a moral agent while being incapable of moral judgment.

2: The cited source does not support the claim in the sentence. Taylor's actual text assigns moral agency to those who can make moral choices, not judgments. I don't think it's an especially good definition anyway, but I think it more accurate than the one here.

3: Some very important accounts of morality do not treat 'right' and 'wrong' as central concepts.

4: The ability to be held accountable is not ideal phrasing - it means 'morally responsible', but not all those who are morally responsible can be held accountable.

I will make a fairly minimal edit - 'judgments' to 'choices' - to ensure that it at least accurately represents the cited source. I'll hold off on a larger change for a bit as it is obviously an important section and I'm new to editing etiquette. I do think it needs a more substantial rewording though and am happy do do it myself at some point. Potentially useful references: Routledge on Moral Agents, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy on Agency.

Wreer806 (talk) 20:00, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]