David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Studies 163 (2):479-502 (2013)
A familiar feature of our moral responsibility practices are pleas: considerations, such as “That was an accident”, or “I didn’t know what else to do”, that attempt to get agents accused of wrongdoing off the hook. But why do these pleas have the normative force they do in fact have? Why does physical constraint excuse one from responsibility, while forgetfulness or laziness does not? I begin by laying out R. Jay Wallace’s (Responsibility and the moral sentiments, 1994 ) theory of the normative force of excuses and exemptions. For each category of plea, Wallace offers a single governing moral principle that explains their normative force. The principle he identifies as governing excuses is the Principle of No Blameworthiness without Fault: an agent is blameworthy only if he has done something wrong. The principle he identifies as governing exemptions is the Principle of Reasonableness: an agent is morally accountable only if he is normatively competent. I argue that Wallace’s theory of exemptions is sound, but that his account of the normative force of excuses is problematic, in that it fails to explain the full range of excuses we offer in our practices, especially the excuses of addiction and extreme stress. I then develop a novel account of the normative force of excuses, which employs what I call the “Principle of Reasonable Opportunity,” that can explain the full range of excuses we offer and that is deeply unified with Wallace’s theory of the normative force of exemptions. An important implication of the theory I develop is that moral responsibility requires free will.
|Keywords||moral responsibility free will blame semi-compatibilism R. Jay Wallace addiction|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Thomas Scanlon (1998). What We Owe to Each Other. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Robert H. Kane (1996). The Significance of Free Will. Oxford University Press.
John Martin Fischer & Mark Ravizza (1998). Responsibility and Control: A Theory of Moral Responsibility. Cambridge University Press.
Thomas Scanlon (2008). Moral Dimensions: Permissibility, Meaning, Blame. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Derk Pereboom (2001). Living Without Free Will. Cambridge University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Yuval Avnur (2015). Excuses for Hume's Skepticism. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 91 (2):n/a-n/a.
Christopher Evan Franklin (forthcoming). Agent-Causation, Explanation, and Akrasia: A Reply to Levy's Hard Luck. [REVIEW] Criminal Law and Philosophy:1-18.
Similar books and articles
Marion Smiley (1992). Moral Responsibility and the Boundaries of Community. University of Chicago Press.
R. Jay Wallace (ed.) (2006). Normativity and the Will: Selected Papers on Moral Psychology and Practical Reason. Oxford University Press.
Jeremy Horder (2004). Excusing Crime. OUP Oxford.
François Tanguay-Renaud (forthcoming). Puzzling About State Excuses as an Instance of Group Excuses. In R. A. Duff, L. Farmer, S. Marshall & V. Tadros (eds.), The Constitution of Criminal Law. Oxford University Press
R. Jay Wallace (1996). Responsibility and the Moral Sentiments. Harvard University Press.
Matthew Talbert (2008). Blame and Responsiveness to Moral Reasons: Are Psychopaths Blameworthy? Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 89 (4):516-535.
Andrew Sneddon (2005). Moral Responsibility: The Difference of Strawson, and the Difference It Should Make. [REVIEW] Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 8 (3):239-264.
R. Jay Wallace (2002). Replies. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 64 (3):707–727.
Michelle Madden Dempsey (2013). Victimless Conduct and the Volenti Maxim: How Consent Works. [REVIEW] Criminal Law and Philosophy 7 (1):11-27.
Manuel Vargas (2009). Taking the Highway on Skepticism, Luck, and the Value of Responsibility. [REVIEW] Journal of Moral Philosophy 6 (2):249-265.
Chad Hansen (1972). Freedom and Moral Responsibility in Confucian Ethics. Philosophy East and West 22 (2):169-186.
Gunnar Björnsson & Karl Persson (2009). Judgments of Moral Responsibility – a Unified Account. In  Society for Philosophy and Psychology, 35th Annual Meeting (Bloomington, IN; June 12-14). 326-354.
Ellen Frankel Paul, Fred Dycus Miller & Jeffrey Paul (eds.) (1999). Responsibility. Cambridge University Press.
Manuel Vargas (2009). Taking the Highway on Skepticism, Luck, and the Value of Responsibility. Journal of Moral Philosophy 6 (2):249-265.
Added to index2011-10-12
Total downloads46 ( #72,699 of 1,724,890 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #210,938 of 1,724,890 )
How can I increase my downloads?