{"id":13951,"date":"2026-09-12T22:19:41","date_gmt":"2026-09-12T22:19:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/?p=13951"},"modified":"2026-09-12T22:19:41","modified_gmt":"2026-09-12T22:19:41","slug":"the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\/","title":{"rendered":"The Evolving Taxonomy of Moral Agency"},"content":{"rendered":"<h3>The Architecture of Agency: A Comparative Report on Moral Subjectivity and Responsibility<\/h3>\n<h4>1. Introduction: The Evolving Taxonomy of Moral Agency<\/h4>\n<p>As autonomous systems, complex corporate structures, and new insights into animal ethology challenge our traditional ethical boundaries, the strategic importance of defining &#8220;moral agency&#8221; has never been greater. For centuries, the domain of moral participation was reserved almost exclusively for the human rational agent. However, as non-human entities increasingly occupy roles of significant social and ethical consequence\u2014ranging from AI-driven healthcare diagnostics to the legal personhood of corporations\u2014we must move beyond a species-centric model. To maintain a functional moral community, we must examine the specific functional requirements that allow an entity to participate in moral life, regardless of its biological or structural origin.The &#8220;Orthodox View&#8221; of moral agency traditionally rests on three pillars: the capacity to distinguish right from wrong, the ability to make autonomous choices, and the liability to be held accountable for those actions. Under this framework, an agent is not merely an object of concern (a moral patient) but a participant capable of being praised or blamed. As we shall see, this benchmark remains the foundation upon which all other comparative frameworks are built, though the boundaries are increasingly porous.<!--more--><\/p>\n<p><iframe loading=\"lazy\" title=\"Engineering Moral Responsibility\" width=\"604\" height=\"340\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/46lteShnxyg?feature=oembed\" frameborder=\"0\" allow=\"accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share\" referrerpolicy=\"strict-origin-when-cross-origin\" allowfullscreen><\/iframe><\/p>\n<h4>2. The Benchmark: Human Rational Agents and the Reflection Condition<\/h4>\n<p>Human agency serves as the traditional &#8220;gold standard&#8221; in ethics due to its perceived alignment between internal thought and external action. Understanding its hierarchical structure is vital for identifying where other entities, such as animals or artificial systems, diverge from the human model.The hallmark of human agency is the &#8220;Reflection Condition,&#8221; rooted in Kantian and Aristotelian thought. This condition suggests that to be moral, an agent must be able to reflect upon their motivations and evaluate them according to abstract principles. Harry Frankfurt\u2019s influential hierarchical model further clarifies this by distinguishing between different levels of desire:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li aria-level=\"1\">First-Order Desires:\u00a0 Immediate, base motivations or impulses (e.g., the desire to eat or the impulse to act).<\/li>\n<li aria-level=\"1\">Second-Order Volitions:\u00a0 A meta-capacity not just to have desires about desires, but to care about which first-order desire moves one to action. A &#8220;person&#8221; is defined by the capacity to want a specific desire to be their will.<\/li>\n<li aria-level=\"1\">The &#8220;Miracle-of-the-Meta&#8221;:\u00a0 Mark Rowlands critiques the assumption that reflection automatically grants control. He argues that the same questions of control arising at the level of base motivation are replicated at the level of evaluation.This hierarchical model faces significant philosophical hurdles. The\u00a0 &#8220;Problem of Origins&#8221;\u00a0 suggests that a second-order endorsement might itself be conditioned by external or biological factors, undermining true autonomy. Furthermore, the\u00a0 &#8220;Infinite Regress&#8221;\u00a0 problem arises: if a second-order desire requires a third-order desire for validation, and so on, agency risks dissolving into an endless chain. Frankfurt\u2019s proposed solution\u2014 &#8220;Satisfaction&#8221; \u2014is often critiqued as a state of &#8220;volitional passivity&#8221; or resignation, where the agent simply ceases to seek further validation, rather than exercising robust active control.Furthermore, we must evaluate the &#8220;Authenticity&#8221; and &#8220;Competency&#8221; conditions. While Authenticity requires identifying with one&#8217;s commitments, it can be &#8220;too strong&#8221; or even self-deceptive. As Peeters and Velleman suggest, what we call authenticity is often merely an &#8220;ideal self-image&#8221; or a &#8220;public persona&#8221; (a Jungian mask) rather than a manifestation of the true self. This reflective agent serves as the point of departure for Rowlands\u2019 &#8220;moral subjects&#8221; in the animal kingdom.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h4>3. Moral Subjects: Rowlands\u2019 Animal Ethology<\/h4>\n<p>A strategic shift is occurring in ethology: moving from viewing animals as mere &#8220;moral patients&#8221; (objects of concern) to &#8220;moral subjects.&#8221; Moral subjects are beings that act for moral reasons but lack the cognitive machinery for reflective responsibility. This shift bypasses the need for intellectual reflection by focusing on &#8220;moral emotions.&#8221;Rowlands argues that emotions like empathy, compassion, or grief track &#8220;evaluative propositions&#8221; (e.g., &#8220;that being is in distress&#8221;) without requiring the subject to abstractly entertain the proposition. Normativity here is grounded in a &#8220;Wittgensteinian vein&#8221;\u2014as participation in social practices. Morality is a matter of navigating a shared world through learned patterns of response, rather than internal meta-cognition.<\/p>\n<h5>Comparative Analysis: Moral Agent vs. Moral Subject<\/h5>\n<p>Feature,Moral Agent (Human),Moral Subject (Animal)<\/p>\n<p>Primary Motivation,Reflective principles; second-order volitions.,&#8221;Moral emotions (empathy, sympathy, grief).&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Reflection,&#8221;Required; &#8220;&#8221;Reflection Condition&#8221;&#8221; via meta-cognition.&#8221;,Not required; tracks moral content via direct emotion.<\/p>\n<p>Responsibility,Full; held accountable via praise\/blame.,None; acts for moral reasons without responsibility.<\/p>\n<p>Normative Force,Derived from reflective self-evaluation.,Derived from participation in social practices.<\/p>\n<p>Rowlands\u2019 argument rests on three pillars:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li aria-level=\"1\">Evaluative Tracking:\u00a0 Emotions track true moral content.<\/li>\n<li aria-level=\"1\">Moral Reasons:\u00a0 Acting on a moral emotion is functionally acting for a moral reason.<\/li>\n<li aria-level=\"1\">Subjecthood vs. Agenthood:\u00a0 One can act for reasons without being an agent who is held responsible.Crucially, the\u00a0 &#8220;Understanding Condition&#8221;\u00a0 distinguishes the two. In folk morality, we do not blame those who do not understand what they are doing. However, as critics note, this is a &#8220;folk intuition&#8221; that is often stipulated rather than justified. If we cannot justify why understanding is the prerequisite for responsibility, the line between animal subjects and human agents may be one of degree rather than kind.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<h4>4. Collective Actors: Corporate Moral Agency and CID Structures<\/h4>\n<p>While animals represent biological subjects, corporations represent a structural, abstract agency. The strategic necessity of corporate agency is driven by the requirements of legal liability and the &#8220;Stakeholder vs. Shareholder&#8221; debate.<\/p>\n<h5>CID Analysis vs. Legal Fiction<\/h5>\n<p>Peter French argues that &#8220;Corporate Internal Decision&#8221; (CID) structures\u2014comprising organization charts and &#8220;rules of recognition&#8221; (bylaws)\u2014create corporate intentions distinct from individuals. Conversely, Manuel Velasquez views the corporation as a &#8220;Legal Fiction,&#8221; where agency is merely a design of natural persons.<\/p>\n<h5>The Responsibility Paradox and Jurisprudential Weight<\/h5>\n<p>This creates a\u00a0 Responsibility Paradox : a corporation can be found liable for an outcome that no specific natural person within the firm intended or caused. This has profound jurisprudential consequences, dictating two competing models:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li aria-level=\"1\">Firm-State (Stakeholder View):\u00a0 The corporation is a polity where stakeholders have voice rights, similar to citizens.<\/li>\n<li aria-level=\"1\">Firm-Contract (Shareholder View):\u00a0 The corporation is a &#8220;nexus-of-contracts,&#8221; where the primary duty is the fiduciary care of equity owners.From a strategic standpoint, the CID view allows for the attribution of corporate &#8220;guilt,&#8221; whereas the Legal Fiction view insists that responsibility must always be traced back to a human &#8220;natural person.&#8221;<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h4>5. The Technological Frontier: Autonomous AI and the Responsibility Gap<\/h4>\n<p>As learning automata enter high-stakes domains like healthcare and warfare, we face the emergence of &#8220;Artificial Moral Agents&#8221; (AMAs) and a resulting\u00a0 &#8220;Responsibility Gap.&#8221;\u00a0 Traditional concepts of responsibility fail when machines move beyond human oversight through emergent learning.<\/p>\n<h5>Being vs. Taking Responsibility<\/h5>\n<p>A critical distinction exists between &#8220;being responsible&#8221; (causal or legal liability) and &#8220;taking responsibility.&#8221; In many strategic contexts, such as medical errors, humans &#8220;take the blame&#8221; for machine failures to maintain social trust. Tigard proposes a &#8220;workable notion&#8221; of artificial responsibility based on &#8220;Social Responsiveness&#8221;\u2014a bottom-up approach that integrates machines into the moral community based on their interactions.<\/p>\n<h5>Requirements for Social Responsiveness<\/h5>\n<p>To ground artificial responsibility, an AMA must satisfy several interactive requirements:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li aria-level=\"1\">Recognition of Human Sentiment:\u00a0 The ability to track and respond to human emotional states and normative expectations.<\/li>\n<li aria-level=\"1\">Acknowledgment of Error:\u00a0 The capacity to &#8220;admit&#8221; fallibility, allowing for a functional social response.<\/li>\n<li aria-level=\"1\">Interactive Reciprocity:\u00a0 Features like the &#8220;pretty please&#8221; function in digital assistants, which facilitate polite, reciprocal engagement.<\/li>\n<li aria-level=\"1\">Moral Community Participation:\u00a0 Integration into the &#8220;Reactive Attitudes&#8221; (Strawson) of humans, where our practices of holding the machine responsible (even if it cannot feel guilt) stabilize our moral ecology.This contrasts a &#8220;Consequentialist&#8221; view (reprogramming as &#8220;punishment&#8221;) with a social-relational view where the machine\u2019s &#8220;responsiveness&#8221; allows it to function as a surrogate agent.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<h4>6. Synthesis: Comparative Architecture of Responsibility<\/h4>\n<p>A unified view is essential for future policy. Understanding these boundaries prevents the &#8220;abdication of human responsibility&#8221; by ensuring we do not misattribute agency while still closing &#8220;retribution gaps.&#8221;<\/p>\n<h5>Comparative Matrix of Moral Participation<\/h5>\n<p>Entity Type,Internal Decision Structure,Volitional Capacity,Accountability Mechanism,Key Representative Concept<\/p>\n<p>Humans,Reflection &amp; Meta-cognition,Second-order Volitions,Moral Blame\/Praise &amp; Legal,Authenticity &amp; Autonomy<\/p>\n<p>Animals,Moral Emotions,First-order Desires,None (Moral Patients),Evaluative Propositions<\/p>\n<p>Corporations,CID Structures (Bylaws),Rules of Recognition,Legal Liability \/ Fines,Collective Actor<\/p>\n<p>Autonomous AI,Algorithms &amp; Learning Automata,Programmed \/ Emergent,Consequentialist \/ Functional,Social Responsiveness<\/p>\n<h5>The &#8220;So What?&#8221; Layer: Strategic Implications<\/h5>\n<p>The &#8220;Responsibility Gap&#8221; is the common thread across all four categories. Whether it is a corporation hiding behind a CID structure, an animal acting on &#8220;unthinking&#8221; empathy, or a &#8220;black box&#8221; AI, the risk remains that humans will use these complexities to avoid the hard work of moral accounting. By defining these architectures, we recognize that while humans alone may be capable of &#8220;taking responsibility&#8221; through reflective understanding, other entities function as vital participants in our moral life. The distinction between these types is increasingly a matter of degree in functional participation, rather than a fundamental difference in kind.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Architecture of Agency: A Comparative Report on Moral Subjectivity and Responsibility 1. Introduction: The Evolving Taxonomy of Moral Agency As autonomous systems, complex<a class=\"moretag\" href=\"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\/\">Read More&#8230;<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":13952,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"googlesitekit_rrm_CAowu7GVCw:productID":"","activitypub_content_warning":"","activitypub_content_visibility":"","activitypub_max_image_attachments":3,"activitypub_interaction_policy_quote":"anyone","activitypub_status":"federated","footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[50,15586,2223,21146,2177,2175,2233,21139,21140,21135,782,2231,2518,21145,21138,2225,21143,11292,21144],"class_list":["post-13951","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-economy","tag-articles","tag-autonomy","tag-branches-of-philosophy","tag-concept-humans","tag-ethical-theories","tag-ethics","tag-harry-frankfurt","tag-manuel-velasquez","tag-mark-rowlands","tag-moral-agency","tag-moral-psychology","tag-moral-responsibility","tag-morality","tag-peeters","tag-peter-french","tag-philosophy-of-life","tag-responsibility","tag-social-philosophy","tag-velleman"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v28.4 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>The Evolving Taxonomy of Moral Agency - Mpelembe Network<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"A moral agent is a being who has the capacity to tell right from wrong, make autonomous choices, and be held accountable for their actions\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Evolving Taxonomy of Moral Agency - Mpelembe Network\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"A moral agent is a being who has the capacity to tell right from wrong, make autonomous choices, and be held accountable for their actions\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Mpelembe Network\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-09-12T22:19:41+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/pulpit.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1034\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"557\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/index.php\\\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/index.php\\\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/2421ebbf3150931b1066b10a196d7608\"},\"headline\":\"The Evolving Taxonomy of Moral Agency\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-09-12T22:19:41+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/index.php\\\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":1482,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/index.php\\\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/pulpit.png\",\"keywords\":[\"Articles\",\"Autonomy\",\"Branches of philosophy\",\"Concept Humans\",\"Ethical theories\",\"Ethics\",\"Harry Frankfurt\",\"Manuel Velasquez\",\"Mark Rowlands\",\"Moral agency\",\"Moral psychology\",\"Moral responsibility\",\"Morality\",\"Peeters\",\"Peter French\",\"Philosophy of life\",\"Responsibility\",\"Social philosophy\",\"velleman\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Economy\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/index.php\\\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/index.php\\\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\\\/\",\"name\":\"The Evolving Taxonomy of Moral Agency - Mpelembe Network\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/index.php\\\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/index.php\\\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/pulpit.png\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-09-12T22:19:41+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/2421ebbf3150931b1066b10a196d7608\"},\"description\":\"A moral agent is a being who has the capacity to tell right from wrong, make autonomous choices, and be held accountable for their actions\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/index.php\\\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/index.php\\\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/index.php\\\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/pulpit.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/09\\\/pulpit.png\",\"width\":1034,\"height\":557},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/index.php\\\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Evolving Taxonomy of Moral Agency\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/\",\"name\":\"Mpelembe Network\",\"description\":\"Agentic Integrated Intelligence Collaboration Platform\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/2421ebbf3150931b1066b10a196d7608\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/c66a2765397adfb52418f6f2310640167a0af23ce662da1b68c8a0b8650de556?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/c66a2765397adfb52418f6f2310640167a0af23ce662da1b68c8a0b8650de556?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/c66a2765397adfb52418f6f2310640167a0af23ce662da1b68c8a0b8650de556?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/mpelembe.net\\\/index.php\\\/author\\\/admin\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"The Evolving Taxonomy of Moral Agency - Mpelembe Network","description":"A moral agent is a being who has the capacity to tell right from wrong, make autonomous choices, and be held accountable for their actions","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Evolving Taxonomy of Moral Agency - Mpelembe Network","og_description":"A moral agent is a being who has the capacity to tell right from wrong, make autonomous choices, and be held accountable for their actions","og_url":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\/","og_site_name":"Mpelembe Network","article_published_time":"2026-09-12T22:19:41+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1034,"height":557,"url":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/pulpit.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\/"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/#\/schema\/person\/2421ebbf3150931b1066b10a196d7608"},"headline":"The Evolving Taxonomy of Moral Agency","datePublished":"2026-09-12T22:19:41+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\/"},"wordCount":1482,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/pulpit.png","keywords":["Articles","Autonomy","Branches of philosophy","Concept Humans","Ethical theories","Ethics","Harry Frankfurt","Manuel Velasquez","Mark Rowlands","Moral agency","Moral psychology","Moral responsibility","Morality","Peeters","Peter French","Philosophy of life","Responsibility","Social philosophy","velleman"],"articleSection":["Economy"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\/","url":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\/","name":"The Evolving Taxonomy of Moral Agency - Mpelembe Network","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/pulpit.png","datePublished":"2026-09-12T22:19:41+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/#\/schema\/person\/2421ebbf3150931b1066b10a196d7608"},"description":"A moral agent is a being who has the capacity to tell right from wrong, make autonomous choices, and be held accountable for their actions","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/pulpit.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/09\/pulpit.png","width":1034,"height":557},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/the-evolving-taxonomy-of-moral-agency\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Evolving Taxonomy of Moral Agency"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/#website","url":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/","name":"Mpelembe Network","description":"Agentic Integrated Intelligence Collaboration Platform","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/#\/schema\/person\/2421ebbf3150931b1066b10a196d7608","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c66a2765397adfb52418f6f2310640167a0af23ce662da1b68c8a0b8650de556?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c66a2765397adfb52418f6f2310640167a0af23ce662da1b68c8a0b8650de556?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c66a2765397adfb52418f6f2310640167a0af23ce662da1b68c8a0b8650de556?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/mpelembe.net"],"url":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/author\/admin\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13951","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13951"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13951\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":13953,"href":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13951\/revisions\/13953"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/13952"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13951"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13951"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/mpelembe.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13951"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}