I think your last sentence is a good summary of my position on this matter: you have a moral duty to all moral agents in general—but only to moral agents. Non-moral agents are out of bound (although you can still exert charity toward them if you want, it’s just not a moral duty).
Yes it does, as they are future moral agent. To be precise, I think that the potentiality to be a moral agent is enough, so babies (even unborn) and cryonic patients are covered. (in fact if one particular animal showed sign of being a moral agent, that would be enough for me to grant the status to its whole species).
I recommend using distinct phrases for “moral targets”, those entities you morally consider in your actions, and “moral agents”, those entities which make decisions you evaluate in a moral framework.
Babies are moral targets, they are in the process of becoming moral agents. IMO, both are quantities rather than binary classifications—some moral agents are more culpable than others for the same actions, and some moral targets get more weight than others in evaluating actions. I recognize this isn’t universal, but I have yet to have a productive cruxing session with anyone who claims absolutes on this topic.
I recommend using distinct phrases for “moral targets”, those entities you morally consider in your actions, and “moral agents”, those entities which make decisions you evaluate in a moral framework.
I think your last sentence is a good summary of my position on this matter: you have a moral duty to all moral agents in general—but only to moral agents. Non-moral agents are out of bound (although you can still exert charity toward them if you want, it’s just not a moral duty).
Does the category of “moral agents” include babies? Just curious.
Yes it does, as they are future moral agent. To be precise, I think that the potentiality to be a moral agent is enough, so babies (even unborn) and cryonic patients are covered. (in fact if one particular animal showed sign of being a moral agent, that would be enough for me to grant the status to its whole species).
Agreed. By the way, I am just watching Conquest of the Planet of the Apes. :D
I recommend using distinct phrases for “moral targets”, those entities you morally consider in your actions, and “moral agents”, those entities which make decisions you evaluate in a moral framework.
Babies are moral targets, they are in the process of becoming moral agents. IMO, both are quantities rather than binary classifications—some moral agents are more culpable than others for the same actions, and some moral targets get more weight than others in evaluating actions. I recognize this isn’t universal, but I have yet to have a productive cruxing session with anyone who claims absolutes on this topic.
The traditional term is “moral patient”.