Moral Responsibility for Concepts

European Journal of Philosophy 26 (4):1381-1397 (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I argue that we are sometimes morally responsible for having and using (or not using) our concepts, despite the fact that we generally do not choose to have them or have full or direct voluntary control over how we use them. I do so by extending an argument of Angela Smith's; the same features that she says make us morally responsible for some of our attitudes also make us morally responsible for some of our concepts. Specifically, like attitudes, concepts can be (a) conceptually and rationally connected to our evaluative judgments, (b) in principle subject to rational revision (reasons‐responsive), and (c) the basis for actual and potential moral assessments of people that we have good reasons to endorse. Thus, we are open to moral appraisal on the basis of having and using (or not using) our concepts when they reflect our evaluative judgments, though even then it is not always appropriate to praise or blame us on that basis.

Other Versions

No versions found

Similar books and articles

Conceptual responsibility.Trystan S. Goetze - 2021 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 64 (1-2):20-45.
Conceptual Responsibility.Trystan S. Goetze - 2018 - Dissertation, University of Sheffield
Attitudes, Agency, and Responsibility.Angela Marie Smith - 1999 - Dissertation, Harvard University
The Source of Responsibility.Randolph Clarke - 2023 - Ethics 133 (2):163–188.
Attitudes, Tracing, and Control.Angela M. Smith - 2015 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 32 (2):115-132.
From Doxastic Blame to Doxastic Shame.Allan Hazlett - 2024 - Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy 11.

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-07-17

Downloads
1,132 (#15,552)

6 months
117 (#45,417)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Rachel Fredericks
Independent Scholar

References found in this work

Responsibility and the Moral Sentiments.R. Jay Wallace - 1994 - Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
The Significance of Free Will.Robert Kane - 1996 - New York, US: Oxford University Press USA.
What We Owe to Each Other.Thomas Scanlon - 2002 - Mind 111 (442):323-354.

View all 55 references / Add more references