Sure, a small child, infant, and nascent zygote human are helpless and cannot be self-sustaining. Great point. I'll restrict myself to adults who have the cap

Sure, a small child, infant, and nascent zygote human are helpless and cannot be self-sustaining. Great point. I'll restrict myself to adults who have the capability to act upon the world for this discussion from here on out. > How much agency does a human raised illiterate far away from civilization have? Is your definition of agency in this context, * the state of being in action or of exerting power; operation, or * a means of exerting power or influence; instrumentality? Nothing in those definitions have anything to do with literacy or society. It seems to me that an adult far away from civilization has as much agency as his brains and muscles can deliver: there's no rules for that person to be concerned with other than laws of nature. They're able to exercise their raw humanity. Obviously, such an adult lacks the amplifying powers of chemicals, electricity, computers, transport, etc that we have. But, who are we to judge the power/potential/quality of a feral human adult in the wild to do incredible things with his environment? Agency is a trait, not a quantity, and that's why it's a birthright. (It can be denied a person, however.) Just do some thought experiments. What's the most powerful thing you could imagine yourself accomplishing before you died if we dropped you off in the wilderness with nothing but the clothes on your back? Don't just stop at "curl up and die", really shoot for the moon. I came up with some amazing things. Now, if you were to argue that humans have nearly limitless potential but are impotent to realize that potential without the work of others, then I'd say you're on to something really profound and worth exploring and optimizing for, philosophical. But, I think what you've stated here is that an individual apart from society somehow has diminished agency. You're either confusing concepts or underestimating man.