Scribd
Upload
415 views2 pages

Morality

This document discusses the moral accountability of a driver who accidentally hit a drunk man in the road. It analyzes whether the driver or drunk man should be considered the moral agent based on the conditions for moral accountability. While the driver was tired and stressed, it was not their intention to hit the man. The drunk man, aware of the risks, intentionally walked into the road. As such, the drunk man meets all the qualifications to be the moral agent who is morally accountable, while the driver is exempt due to lacking intent. The essay aims to identify the moral agent and patient by applying the conditions for moral accountability.

Uploaded by

Ericka Ojeda
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
415 views2 pages

Morality

This document discusses the moral accountability of a driver who accidentally hit a drunk man in the road. It analyzes whether the driver or drunk man should be considered the moral agent based on the conditions for moral accountability. While the driver was tired and stressed, it was not their intention to hit the man. The drunk man, aware of the risks, intentionally walked into the road. As such, the drunk man meets all the qualifications to be the moral agent who is morally accountable, while the driver is exempt due to lacking intent. The essay aims to identify the moral agent and patient by applying the conditions for moral accountability.

Uploaded by

Ericka Ojeda
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Are you still the same person morally when you are drunk?

Moral accountability
while intoxicated is a controversy debated by countless people, whether the person in
his/her inebriated state should be held accountable for the actions that he/she has
done. A study has revealed that although alcohol causes varied behavioral changes,
drunkenness does not rid a person of his/her moral compass. Moral persons are
categorized into two: a moral agent and a moral patient. To be called a moral agent,
he/she must be the one performing such action or is at least the source of it. To be a
moral patient, one must be the receiver of those said actions. A tired and stressed
driver unintentionally hitting an intoxicated man who’s suddenly appeared in the middle
of the road and demanding compensation is a case for moral judgment. In the case
given above, there is a blurred and hazy line between who the moral agent and moral
patient are. Both are not in full capacity of clear level-headed logical reasoning yet it
does not mean their moral judgments have been impaired. This essay will tackle the
moral accountability of both persons involved; the conditions set for moral
accountability and identify who accounts as the moral patient and agent between the
two.

Moral accountability, as defined by the ethics activist Geoff Hunt, is the


"readiness or preparedness to give an explanation or justification to relevant others for
one’s judgment, intentions, act and omissions when approximately called upon to do
so." Although it can be used interchangeably with responsibility, it is a principle
different from responsibility as it has specific conditions to be able to account for a
person to be held morally accountable for their actions.

To analyze the moral accountability of the persons involved, it is vital to collate


the given scenario with the given conditions. Since the driver lost control and
accidentally hit the drunk man, then he must be the doer of the action, the moral
agent. The drunk man, getting hit by a car, then makes him the moral patient. That is if
you look at it that way. However, the fact that he suddenly came out on the road out of
nowhere should not be ignored. The driver was only driving home from work so it was
not her intention to purposely hit the man. We can say that he is legally accountable,
but not morally. As a reference to the encapsulated conditions of agency condition
(knowledge and intentionality condition), the following circumstances must be met for
an individual to be held accountable: the person is the agent of the action, the person
knows or have the capacity to know that the action is good or bad and lastly,
intentionally performs an action. Hence, failure to meet at least one of the required
conditions stated will result in an exemption of the person from moral accountability.
Because the driver meets the first two conditions of being the moral agent but not the
third, he is now exempted and is not morally accountable.

On the other hand, the drunk man was intoxicated when he appeared on the
road, a public place for vehicular travel. It is common knowledge among people to
thread lightly and take caution in crossing through it. The man may be drunk but that
knowledge is still stored at the back of his mind. He was wholly aware of the
consequences of what will transpire if he crosses that road and yet still trudged on with
the act. He is the agent of the action, has the moral compass to judge the situation,
and lastly, had full intention to do the act. His actions incriminate him as the moral
agent the moment he went to the road and made the driver lose control, more so when
he asked for compensation and yelled at the driver. Some might even suspect that he
had done the action with the possible compensation he will receive at the back of his
mind. The drunk man meets all the qualifications under the agency condition, therefore
making him the moral agent that is morally accountable for the action.

Certain established conditions must be met to qualify for moral accountability-


the attribution conditions (incriminating and excusing conditions) and the degree
conditions (mitigating or aggravating conditions). The attribution condition indicates
whether the person is accountable or not. If he/she fails to meet at least one of the
conditions, then he/she is spared from moral accountability. Meanwhile, the degree
condition only measures the degree of the person's accountability, if he/ she is indeed
morally accountable. While some actions done by a moral person may seem absurd and
antagonistic, it is not enough reason for him/ her to be held morally accountable. We
can only be truly accountable based on our intentions, not the result of our actions.

You might also like