David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 6 (4):349-376 (2003)
Real-self accounts of moral responsibility distinguish between various types of motivational elements. They claim that an agent is responsible for acts suitably related to elements that constitute the agent's real self. While such accounts have certain advantages from a compatibilist perspective, they are problematic in various ways. First, in it, authority and authenticity conceptions of the real self are often inadequately distinguished. Both of these conceptions inform discourse on identification, but only the former is relevant to moral responsibility. Second, authority and authenticity real-self theories are unable to accommodate cases in which the agent neither identifies nor disidentifies with his action and yet seems morally responsible for what he does. Third, authority and authenticity real-self theories are vulnerable to counterexamples in which the provenance of the agent's real self undermines responsibility
|Keywords||Compatibilism Ethics Identification Motivation Responsibility Bratman, M Frankfurt, H Watson, G|
|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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
David Faraci & David Shoemaker (2010). Insanity, Deep Selves, and Moral Responsibility: The Case of JoJo. Review of Philosophy and Psychology 1 (3): 319-332.
David Shoemaker (2009). Responsibility and Disability. Metaphilosophy 40 (3-4):438-461.
Similar books and articles
Susanne Bobzien (2006). Moral Responsibility and Moral Development in Epicurus’ Philosophy. In B. Reis & S. Haffmans (eds.), The Virtuous Life in Greek Ethics. CUP.
Ishtiyaque Haji (1999). Indeterminism and Frankfurt-Type Examples. Philosophical Explorations 2 (1):42-58.
Michael J. Phillips (1992). Corporate Moral Personhood and Three Conceptions of the Corporation. Business Ethics Quarterly 2 (4):435-459.
Ishtiyaque Haji (1998). Moral Appraisability: Puzzles, Proposals, and Perplexities. Oxford University Press.
Susan Wolf (1987). Sanity and the Metaphysics of Responsibility. In Ferdinand David Schoeman (ed.), Responsibility, Character, and the Emotions: New Essays in Moral Psychology. Cambridge University Press. 281.
Kevin Timpe (2009). Causal History Matters, but Not for Individuation. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 39 (1):77-91.
Patrick Todd (2011). A New Approach to Manipulation Arguments. Philosophical Studies 152 (1):127-133.
Andy Taylor (2010). Moral Responsibility and Subverting Causes. Dissertation, University of Reading
Bindu Madhok (2002). The Price of Frankfurt's Compatibilism. Journal of Philosophical Research 27:577-584.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads66 ( #22,717 of 1,102,881 )
Recent downloads (6 months)7 ( #36,679 of 1,102,881 )
How can I increase my downloads?