Words: 16,078

This paper examines how individuals are morally reflexive beings, who interpret the social world in relation to things that matter to them, and how charitable acts are embedded in their lives with different degrees of meaning and importance. The paper criticises the Bourdieusian theory of giving, arguing that, contrary to that theory, individuals are capable of reflexivity, emotion and disinterestedness. Drawing upon Margaret Archer‟s and Andrew Sayer‟s works on reflexivity and lay normativity, I will suggest that there are three categories of moral reflexivity that have various implications for charitable giving, moral obligations and civil society. First, moral conventionalists, who value familial and social networks and use charity events as an opportunity to socialise and to have fun. Second, moral individualists, who are strongly committed to work and career and view charitable practices as public acts that demonstrate their knowledge and skills. Third, moral critics who are deeply committed to charitable causes and motivated by strongly held values and beliefs, which offer alternative visions for society