Two approaches to moral responsibility : part one
Richmond Journal of Philosophy 6:14-19 (2004)
| Abstract | In this first part of the article, I want to sketch two things. First, I will say something about the idea of free will. The paradoxes involved in this idea often occur to people even before they come to philosophy, and these difficulties will be central to Kant’s account. But second, before turning to Kant, I would like to tackle Aristotle’s broad approach, and show that, before free will was invented by Christian philosophers, there was a quite different way of thinking about moral responsibility – one that has much to teach us. In the second part of the article, to appear in the next issue, I ask why Kant’s account continues to attract many people who would not dream of calling themselves Kantians – indeed, many who have never even heard Kant’s name. Kant’s theory involves a powerful idea of moral worth based on choice. This idea, though problematic because of the idea of freedom it seems to depend on, does account for many of our intuitions about moral responsibility. But it is not the only explanation of these intuitions, nor – I will argue – is it the most plausible. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,679 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. Try with proxy. Try with proxy. Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesManuel Vargas (2009). Reasons and Real Selves. Ideas y Valores 58 (141):67-84.
Pauline Kleingeld (1999). Kant, History, and the Idea of Moral Development. History of Philosophy Quarterly 16 (1):59-80.
Adam Feltz & Edward T. Cokely (2009). Do Judgments About Freedom and Responsibility Depend on Who You Are? Personality Differences in Intuitions About Compatibilism and Incompatibilism. Consciousness and Cognition 18 (1):342-350.
M. Braham & M. van Hees (2012). An Anatomy of Moral Responsibility. Mind 121 (483):601-634.
Garrath Williams (2011). 'Intelligible Facts':Toward a Constructivist Account of Action and Responsibility. In Sorin Baiasu, Sami Pihlström & Howard Williams (eds.), Politics and Metaphysics in Kant. University of Wales Press.
Manuel Vargas (2009). Taking the Highway on Skepticism, Luck, and the Value of Responsibility. [REVIEW] Journal of Moral Philosophy 6 (2):249-265.
Henry E. Allison (1990). Kant's Theory of Freedom. Cambridge University Press.
Lara Ostaric (2010). Works of Genius as Sensible Exhibitions of the Idea of the Highest Good. Kant-Studien 101 (1):22-39.
Neil Levy & Michael McKenna (2009). Recent Work on Free Will and Moral Responsibility. Philosophy Compass 4 (1):96-133.
Manuel Vargas (2009). Taking the Highway on Skepticism, Luck, and the Value of Responsibility. Journal of Moral Philosophy 6 (2):249-265.
Garrath Williams, Responsibility. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Eddy Nahmias, D. Justin Coates & Trevor Kvaran (2007). Free Will, Moral Responsibility, and Mechanism: Experiments on Folk Intuitions. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 31 (1):214–242.
Kate A. Moran (2009). Can Kant Have an Account of Moral Education? Journal of Philosophy of Education 43 (4):471-484.
John S. Callender (2010). Free Will and Responsibility. A Guide for Practitioners. Oxford University Press.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2011-01-29Total downloads7 ( #133,420 of 549,070 )Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,252 of 549,070 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
