Final answer:
The difference lies in intentionality and freedom of choice; a human act involves conscious choice and moral reasoning, while an act that a human carries out might be a purely reflexive or conditioned response.
Step-by-step explanation:
The difference between (1) a human act and (2) an act that a human carries out is rooted in the intent and the nature of the action itself. A human act refers to actions that are performed with conscious thought, free will, and intention — actions that are deliberate expressions of one's moral choices and rational thought. On the other hand, an act that a human carries out can be seen as any behavior or function that a person does, which might include involuntary or reflex actions, or those determined by external circumstances, such as responses conditioned by societal rewards and punishments.
For instance, choosing to donate to charity because of a genuine desire to help is a human act. In contrast, an act that a human carries out could include patting one's pocket to make sure their keys are there; it is not specifically a moral choice but rather an automatic, conditioned behavior.
For philosophical inquiry, especially in deontological frameworks like Kant's, the distinction is significant. Kantian ethics emphasizes that actions deriving from duty, guided by reason rather than impulse or social conditioning, are inherently good. Strategic or instrumental reasons for actions focus on the outcomes while expressive reasons reflect one's identity, but it is the capacity for rational thought and decision-making that defines human acts in a moral sense.