Ethical Concepts and Self Moral Development - amazonia.fiocruz.br

Ethical Concepts and Self Moral Development Video

I critically examine the concept of responsibility employed by such views, by looking at potential connections with the contemporary literature on moral responsibility. I start by uncovering some of the key assumptions that Responsibility Views make about the relevant concept of responsibility, and by scrutinizing those assumptions under the lens of more general theorizing about responsibility. I identify an important conflict that arises at that point.

Navigation menu

The problem is that the concept presupposed by Responsibility Views is in tension with the standard way of understanding the connection between https://amazonia.fiocruz.br/scdp/essay/writing-practice-test-online/evolution-of-male-dominance-throughout-a-doll.php neutral and non-neutral forms of moral responsibility. I draw attention to a particular strategy that could be used to address this challenge, but I also identify some important obstacles that stand in the way.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution. Rent this article via DeepDyve. See the overview of this literature in Doggett Doggett identifies the appeal to agency the agency of those whom you would harm in self-defense as one of the most important developments in the contemporary self-defense literature.

Or, at least, for the appearance of a threat. See McMahanchapter 4. Although this scalar model of responsibility and culpability has been highly influential, some would disagree with its central tenet see, e. On the other hand, Hosein aims to develop a version of the responsibility view that avoids these counterintuitive implications. On his view, non-responsible threats can be liable, but their lack of responsibility results in here being liable to lesser harms than other threats.

See, e.

Access options

The focus is usually on moral responsibility as a Ethical Concepts and Self Moral Development of accountability —that is to say, a notion of responsibility in light of which we can be held to account for what we do. Sometimes this is distinguished from attributability —a notion of responsibility in light of which our behavior can be attributed to us in that it reflects certain morally significant features of our character, such as our virtues and vices. For a discussion of this distinction, see Watson For example, the conscientious driver is not responsible for her threatening behavior in a sense that is revelatory of any moral vices on her part. Still, the thought is that she can be held to account given that she acted with an understanding of the risk involved.

Expert Solution

For example, Fischer and Ravizza : 8, n. Some proponents of the objective view include CoppSmithWallaceand Widerker McKenna : 14 identifies it as the most commonly accepted view. On the other hand, other subjective views that ground blameworthiness in expressions of Developmejt objectionable quality of will or the negative reactive attitudes they elicit e.

For discussion of this issue, see Sartorio Forthcoming. Pereboom argues that those manipulated agents are not responsible, and, on that basis, that causally determined agents are also not responsible.

For a discussion on this distinction as it bears on the responsibility of manipulated agents, see King So, this move would just push the problem back instead of eliminating it. This is how cases of negligence are typically accommodated within a theory of responsibility. For further discussion, see, e. In contrast, note that the cases of neutral responsibility we examined before in Sect. See note 4 above. On the other hand, if one attempted to revise the Standard View by appealing to differences in kind Ethical Concepts and Self Moral Development mere differences in degreethat would result in a more radical departure from the original version, which would be harder Selr motivate.

Thanks to Helen Frowe for discussion. In contrast, I can be legally responsible for wrongful acts done by my underage children without being blameworthy for them. Alexander, L.]