Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 12 (5) (2009)
|Abstract||Compatibilists about determinism and moral responsibility disagree with one another about the bearing of agents’ histories on whether or not they are morally responsible for some of their actions. Some stories about manipulated agents prompt such disagreements. In this article, I call attention to some of the main features of my own “history-sensitive” compatibilist proposal about moral responsibility, and I argue that arguments advanced by Michael McKenna and Manuel Vargas leave that proposal unscathed.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Peter Brian Barry (2011). Saving Strawson: Evil and Strawsonian Accounts of Moral Responsibility. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (1):5-21.
John Martin Fischer & Mark Ravizza (1998). Responsibility and Control: A Theory of Moral Responsibility. Cambridge University Press.
Alfred R. Mele (2009). Moral Responsibility and Agents' Histories. Philosophical Studies 142 (2):161 - 181.
Manuel Vargas (2009). Taking the Highway on Skepticism, Luck, and the Value of Responsibility. Journal of Moral Philosophy 6 (2):249-265.
Manuel Vargas (2004). Responsibility and the Aims of Theory: Strawson and Revisionism. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 85 (2):218-241.
Neil Levy & Michael McKenna (2009). Recent Work on Free Will and Moral Responsibility. Philosophy Compass 4 (1):96-133.
Manuel Vargas (2006). On the Importance of History for Responsible Agency. Philosophical Studies 127 (3):351-382.
Neil Levy (2007). The Responsibility of the Psychopath Revisited. Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 14 (2):pp. 129-138.
Patrick Todd (2011). A New Approach to Manipulation Arguments. Philosophical Studies 152 (1):127-133.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads61 ( #15,525 of 549,087 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,333 of 549,087 )
How can I increase my downloads?