How is Moral Character Developed

The concept of Moral Character and its Development pertains to the presence or absence of virtues such
as integrity, courage, honesty, and loyalty. Describing someone as having a good moral character
indicates that they are a morally upright individual and a responsible member of society, guided by a
strong ethical sense (De Guzman et al., 2017). It can be understood as an individual's inclination to think,
feel, and act in ways that are ethical rather than unethical, or as the specific set of individual traits
relevant to morality (Cohen & Carnegie, 2014). The development of moral character can be explored
through various approaches, including the cultivation of virtues, dispositional factors, the interplay
between actions and character, as well as theoretical perspectives (De Guzman et al., 2017 and
philonotes.com).

Moral Character and Virtues

The term "character" originates from the ancient Greek word charaktêr, initially denoting the mark on a
coin and later expanded to encompass any distinguishing feature. In contemporary usage, character
commonly denotes a set of qualities distinguishing individuals, notably in literature. However, in
philosophy, character primarily refers to the moral dimension of a person, rooted in the term ēthē,
etymologically linked to "ethics" and "morality." Aristotle, a key figure in virtue ethics, emphasized
virtues as inner moral excellence, distinct from excellences of thought. Virtue ethics emphasizes the
importance of moral character over specific moral actions, viewing virtue as socially valued character
traits rather than moral obligations. Aristotle believed that virtues are developed through habitual
virtuous behavior, emphasizing moderation as the key to virtuous conduct. This doctrine of the mean
suggests that moral behavior lies between two extremes, with moral virtue defined as achieving the just
mean.

Moral Character as Dispositions

Dispositions are specific properties or characteristics inherent in objects, examples include the solubility
of a sugar-cube or the fragility of porcelain. Moral character traits are dispositions of character for which
individuals are held morally responsible, deserving either positive reactions like praise for virtues or
negative reactions like blame for vices. These traits are relatively stable and should be informed by
rationality. Moral character influences moral decisions and is cultivated over time, involving both actions
and emotions. For instance, justice involves treating others as they deserve, and courage entails feeling
appropriate fear levels. Moral character is not externally imposed but develops through the will of the
individual as they mature. It represents a disposition for which individuals can be held morally
accountable.
The Circular Relation of Acts and Character

The interaction between moral character and action involves considering how actions influence
character. Three key aspects of action in this regard are the repetition of actions and their impact on
individuals, the nature of the actions themselves, and the role of intention and accountability.

A. Repetition of Action and its Impact on Individuals

Actions can become repetitive or automatic in various ways: through habit, education, and habitus
(Mitchell, 2015). Habitual actions are those performed repeatedly over time, eventually becoming
ingrained behaviors. For instance, a physician who routinely prescribes contraception without
considering each case individually has developed a habit. Another form of automatic action is a skill
acquired through education and practice. For example, a baker instinctively knows when to stop
kneading dough based on its elasticity. Such actions occur without conscious deliberation or reasoning.

A third way actions become automatic is through habitus, defined by Aquinas as inclination or
disposition. This inclination prompts individuals to respond in certain ways, such as acting charitably
towards those in need without hesitation. However, habitus is not inherently good; one may develop
negative inclinations, like miserliness, through repeated actions. The morality of habitual actions
depends on their inherent moral quality. Additionally, not all actions can be classified as strictly moral or
immoral; there are various types or categories of actions.

B. The Nature of Action

Since humans are comprised of both body and soul, bodily actions are reflective of the self. Actions such
as digesting food, jumping in surprise, or yawning due to tiredness are all considered actions of a human
being, according to Aquinas, and are distinct from human acts (Mitchell, 2015). Human acts are rational
actions that stem from the entirety of the person and are closely tied to character. For example, laughing
at humorous situations involves a moral choice, contrasting with involuntary laughter provoked by
tickling. In moral acts, there is a conscious decision-making process; for instance, laughing at someone's
expense constitutes a negative moral act, while laughing at oneself can be seen as positive, such as an
act of humility. Moreover, abstaining from laughing at inappropriate jokes is often considered a moral
obligation.

C. Intention and Accountability

Two fundamental aspects of action are intention and responsibility, which underscore the revealing
nature of human behavior. Human beings are accountable for their actions and their outcomes, even in
cases of unintended consequences. The will, as described by Aquinas and Wojtyla, is the rational faculty
that enables humans to make choices guided by reason, directing them towards what they perceive as
good (Aquinas, 1948; Wojtyla, 1979).
Responsibility and intention stem from the will, which embodies the self-possession and self-governance
inherent in human nature. Unlike external objects, individuals possess themselves internally,
experiencing consciousness from within. While external forces may influence decision-making, carrying
out an action involves an element of voluntariness, a conscious willingness to act. For instance, a
physician may initially feel compelled to write a prescription for contraception due to external pressures,
but at the moment of writing, the action becomes a voluntary choice (Aristotle, Aquinas).

Additionally, lack of knowledge can hinder the will's execution of an action. An individual may attempt to
drive across a flooded bridge without knowing its true depth, resulting in unintended consequences.
However, with full knowledge, one would refrain from such actions, demonstrating the will's capacity for
self-governance and informed decision-making (Aristotle, Aquinas, Pope John Paul I).

According to Mitchell (2015), human beings possess the autonomy to execute or abstain from actions as
they choose, reflecting both intentionality and accountability for their behaviors.