The primary distinction between an action and an event is that actions are intentional, meaning they are performed with a specific purpose or goal in mind, while events are not.

Aristotle is most closely associated with the theory of 'double agency', which posits that human actions are caused by both internal factors (such as intentions and desires) and external factors (such as circumstances and other people's actions).

The central idea behind the 'compatibilist' position on free will and determinism is that these two concepts are not necessarily contradictory. Compatibilists argue that free will and determinism are compatible because our actions are caused by both internal factors (such as intentions and desires) and external factors (such as circumstances and other people's actions).

According to the 'agent-causal' theory of action, the primary cause of an action is the agent's intention. This theory holds that an action is caused by the agent's intention to perform that action, rather than by the agent's desire, belief, or physical movement.

David Hume is most closely associated with the 'event-causal' theory of action, which posits that actions are caused by prior events, such as the agent's desires, beliefs, and circumstances. Hume argued that there is no such thing as an 'uncaused' action, and that all actions are determined by prior causes.

The central idea behind the 'moral responsibility' principle is that individuals are morally responsible for their actions if they intended to perform those actions. This principle holds that an individual cannot be held morally responsible for an action that they did not intend to perform.

According to the 'Frankfurt-style' counterexample to the principle of alternate possibilities, the key factor that undermines the idea that we have genuine freedom of choice is the existence of 'hard' determinism. Hard determinism is the view that all events, including human actions, are causally determined by prior events, and that there is no room for genuine freedom or alternative possibilities.

Immanuel Kant is most closely associated with the 'agent-based' theory of moral responsibility, which posits that individuals are morally responsible for their actions based on their intentions and character, rather than on the consequences of those actions.

The central idea behind the 'consequentialist' theory of moral responsibility is that individuals are morally responsible for the consequences of their actions, regardless of their intentions. This theory holds that the moral rightness or wrongness of an action is determined by the consequences of that action, rather than by the agent's intentions or character.

According to the 'double effect' principle, an action that has both good and bad consequences can be morally justified if the good consequences outweigh the bad consequences. This principle is often used to justify actions that have both positive and negative outcomes, such as medical procedures that may cause pain but ultimately save a life.

John Stuart Mill is most closely associated with the 'principle of beneficence', which states that individuals have a moral obligation to promote the well-being of others. This principle is often used to justify actions that benefit others, even if they may not benefit the agent themselves.

The central idea behind the 'principle of non-maleficence' is that individuals have a moral obligation to avoid harming others. This principle is often used to justify actions that prevent harm to others, even if they may not benefit the agent themselves.

According to the 'golden mean' theory of virtue, the ideal state of character for a virtuous person is a state of balance between extremes. This theory holds that virtues are not simply the opposite of vices, but rather a balance between two extremes, such as courage being the balance between recklessness and cowardice.

Plato is most closely associated with the 'cardinal virtues', which are four virtues that he considered to be essential for a good life: wisdom, courage, temperance, and justice.

The central idea behind the 'eudaimonic' theory of well-being is that well-being is achieved through the pursuit of virtue. This theory holds that the highest good for human beings is to live a virtuous life, and that happiness is a byproduct of living virtuously.