There is a conventional view of moral agency which might be described as follows. When a person comes to act in a situation, there are two separate matters to be considered: on the one hand the objective facts of the situation, and on the other hand what the agent brings to it – her attitudes, preferences or moral outlook. It has been a central concern of Raimond Gaita to bring this view into question. As I read him, he considers the question of what I take to be the case and the way I respond to be inseparable aspects of a situation. In other words, my description of the world in which I act is in itself expressive of my engagement with it. Through his criticism of the conventional view he has become a distinctive voice in current English-speaking moral philosophy.1