Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 3:1-18 (2009)
|Abstract||Those who advocate a “historicist” outlook on moral responsibility often hold that people who unwillingly acquire corrupt dispositions are not blameworthy for the wrong actions that issue from these dispositions; this contention is frequently supported by thought experiments involving instances of forced psychological manipulation that seem to call responsibility into question. I argue against this historicist perspective and in favor of the conclusion that the process by which a person acquires values and dispositions is largely irrelevant to moral responsibility. While the thought experiments introduced by historicists raise perplexing questions about personal identity and involve clear instances of moral wrongs done to the manipulated subjects, neither of these considerations bear on the question of moral responsibility. Rather, questions about moral responsibility in manipulation cases should be answered, I argue, by considering whether a manipulated agent is capable of expressing through her actions the objectionable attitudes that make blame appropriate in normal cases of wrongdoing.|
|Keywords||manipulation moral responsibility compatibilism historicism|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Patrick Todd (2011). A New Approach to Manipulation Arguments. Philosophical Studies 152 (1):127-133.
Hannah Tierney (forthcoming). A Maneuver Around the Modified Manipulation Argument. Philosophical Studies.
Matthew Talbert (2008). Blame and Responsiveness to Moral Reasons: Are Psychopaths Blameworthy? Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 89 (4):516-535.
Andrew C. Khoury (forthcoming). Manipulation and Mitigation. Philosophical Studies:1-12.
Andrew C. Khoury (forthcoming). Synchronic and Diachronic Responsibility. Philosophical Studies.
Ishtiyaque Haji & Stefaan E. Cuypers (2004). Moral Responsibility and the Problem of Manipulation Reconsidered. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 12 (4):439 – 464.
Alfred R. Mele (2008). Manipulation, Compatibilism, and Moral Responsibility. Journal of Ethics 12 (3/4):263 - 286.
Patrick Todd (2012). Manipulation and Moral Standing: An Argument for Incompatibilism. Philosophers' Imprint 12 (7).
Bindu Madhok (2002). The Price of Frankfurt's Compatibilism. Journal of Philosophical Research 27:577-584.
Neal Judisch (2005). Responsibility, Manipulation and Ownership: Reflections on the Fischer/Ravizza Program. Philosophical Explorations 8 (2):115-130.
Marion Smiley (2010). "From Moral Agency to Collective Wrongs: Re-Thinking Collective Moral Responsibility". Journal of Law and Policy (1):171-202.
Christopher Evan Franklin (2006). Plausibility, Manipulation, and Fischer and Ravizza. Southern Journal of Philosophy 44 (2):173-192.
Ishtiyaque Haji (1998). Moral Appraisability: Puzzles, Proposals, and Perplexities. Oxford University Press.
Roger Clarke (2012). How to Manipulate an Incompatibilistically Free Agent. American Philosophical Quarterly 49 (2):139-49.
Added to index2012-03-06
Total downloads4 ( #178,434 of 548,973 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,511 of 548,973 )
How can I increase my downloads?