Moral agency is a concept in which each human must confront. It is an individual's ability to make moral judgments so they can determine what is right and wrong. How do I know what is right and what is wrong? How do I handle difficult situations? How do I live virtuously?
Stoicism and Buddhism both present distinct philosophies concerning moral living and the ethics of moral agency. Nussbaum’s view of Stoicism focuses on a pursuit of fulfillment in which improvement of one’s actions and performances dictate virtue and its consequences. On the other hand, Coseru’s view on the Buddhist conception of disposition or volition focuses on virtue being a state of embracing “what is” through meditation and reduction of the self. Both of these arguments present an ideology of harmony with the self and nature, selflessness, mindful living, and a pursuit of fulfillment.
The Stoic’s goal of life is living in agreement with nature. Ideal agents will be virtuous, which means that they will apply reason to their natural impulses toward self-interest and social bonding. Ideal agents are also after the perfection of agency and virtue itself, as an end.
Healthy agents will acquire strong norms corresponding to the usual notions of wisdom, justice, benevolence, beneficence, courage, temperance, and other traits that are seen by Nussaum as virtues. Developing such traits is a necessary condition for developing one’s agency.
The Stoics view everything as having a purpose or objective meaning. For example, they see that emotions are judgments or thoughts that are a part of our animal nature. Where Buddhists would see emotions as fleeting feelings, Nussbaum argues that our feelings are correlated with our instincts that makes us aware of something that is actually happening around us. He uses the example that fear is not just fear, but a mental response to an external factor causing the emotion. What makes emotions kinds of intentional mental states are their concern with value.
In order for one to live in agreement with nature, humans develop reason as adults, which transforms their understanding of themselves and their own sense of what is good. The Stoics held that virtue is the only real good. To them, the distinct and uniquely human capacity is reason. Thus for human beings, "living in agreement with nature" means living in agreement with our ability to reason. Stoics only see virtue as good when choice-worthy virtuous actions are made. The performance of appropriate acts is only a necessary and not a sufficient condition of virtuous action. This is because the agent must have the correct understanding of the actions he performs.
The virtuous life of Stoics is free of all passions, which are disrupting to the soul, but includes responses conditioned by rational understanding and the fulfillment of all one's responsibilities. The Stoics believed that the person who has achieved perfect consistency with his rational faculties is the "wise man.” This consistency serves as a prescriptive ideal for all. The Stoics believed that progress toward this goal is both possible and crucial. Nussbaum is convinced that as one approached this goal, one is closer to real and certain happiness.
What sort of moral agency is found in Buddhism? It seems to allow a sort of total freedom from our past, our conditioning, as well as our societal roles expected of us. As Nussbaum promotes a goal of a virtuous life with responsibility of one’s performance and self improvement, Coseru argues a different standpoint regarding the moral agency of a human being. Coresu argues that “the freedom of selfless agency cannot be above the domain of responsibility. Moral agency is inseparable from moral responsibility.”
Similar to the Stoics, the Buddhists strive to save all human beings from suffering and discontent. They know well that it is impossible for human beings to be saved from discontent. Unlike the Stoics, Buddhists see a consciousness without a self. Buddhism is known for this no-self view where individuals lack a fixed self or soul. Persons exist only conventionally. Ultimately, ordinary people like us, who are not enlightened, must be content with merely following moral rules.
Since conditioned things and dispositions are perceptions and do not have real essence, they are not reliable sources of pleasure and they are fleeting, temporary feelings of gratification. Understanding the significance of this reality is seen as wisdom. This concept of "conditioned things" appears in Four Noble Truths that reflects how ignorance or misconceptions about the temporary components of life and non-self lead to and rebirths. Buddhists use meditation to embrace emotions while understanding the are not necessarily reality. Meditation strongly correlates with well-being, self-regulation, purpose directed attention. This results in the reduction of the self and believe there is no “good or bad” and accept what is.
According to Buddhist, all things, whether mental or physical are conditioned things. Everything that is physical and visible in the world are conditioned things a part of of mental conditions. The Buddha emphasized the need to purify dispositions rather than eliminate them completely as dispositions determine our perspectives. The development of one's personality in the direction of perfection or imperfection rests with one's dispositions. Coseru explains how the Buddhist view of the reduction of human which takes volition is to be but one of several contributing factors that shape identity and agency. In the impersonal, natural world, the enlightened beings actions are not so much grounded as conditioned by an ongoing series of enabling factors “if, then” vs. locative absolute “when that, then this”
A key Buddhist element to moral agency is being firmly situated and present yet not attaching oneself to anything. Buddha suggests any feeling, situation, event, etc. be taken as it actually is. “this is not mine, this is not myself” is a famous phrase in which Buddha rejects any concepts of determinism and attachment to the ego.
Stoics see that virtuous performance is key to moral agency. The enlightened beings actions are not so much grounded as conditioned by an ongoing series of enabling factors. However, initiative is essential to moral progress; A way of living with the practical consequences of actions that don’t have agency and lack the sort of relation that entails moral responsibility.
The Stoics and the Buddhists are in agreement that a virtuous life is living in agreement with nature by separating the self-interest from reality. The virtuous life is selfless and free of all passions and desire. Both of these philosophies are striving to save all human beings from suffering and discontent by giving them a philosophy that defines what it means to be virtuous. They seek to cultivate non-violence, wisdom, compassion, and tolerance. They know that we can only be moral in the presence of others. Coseru sees moral agency as inseparable from moral responsibility. Nussbaum sees that our interactions and ability to relate to others is possible due our localized emotions that tell us how our thoughts and judgments lead us to understanding. Buddha rejects any concepts of determinism while Stoics see virtuous performance is key to moral agency. Instead, they use mediation to recognize what one feels, perceives, and thinks about.
Buddhists use meditation to embrace emotions while understanding the are not necessarily reality and accept what is. Stoics value the virtue of perfect disposition, with goal oriented happiness and purpose in all emotions and nature. “Perfect acts” performed in the right way by the agent with an absolutely rational, consistent, and formally perfect disposition are seen as disposition is virtue by Nussbaum. This contrasts directly with Buddhist view of a fleeting life and oneness with fleeting emotions.
Both Nussbaum and Coseru are in agreement that harmony with self and moral agency begin with selflessness, mindful and intentional living, unity with the natural world, and a conditioned moral agency.
.