Our fundamental responsibility responses are emotional appraisals. How we express our anger, shame, regret, guilt, gratitude, etc., are ethical matters, though, about the ways we ought to treat our fellows. And the question of desert—as in “What does he deserve for what he did?”— is fundamentally an ethical question, i.e., “How should we treat those who do angersome things?” But the form of this question applies equally to all sorts of “non-responsibility” arenas as well, i.e., “How should we treat those who are economically worst off in our society?” or “How should we treat people with Huntington’s disease?” We can answer these questions in a variety of ways, but those answers aren’t necessarily dependent on our responsibility responses.
Atributability, Accountability, and Mike Tyson’s Deep Self: An Interview with David Shoemaker, Part II
If Mike Tyson is my neighbor and continually wakes me up in the middle of the night by playing smooth jazz loudly through his open window, I’d best not show my anger to him. I may judge that I shouldn’t feel angry, but I feel it nonetheless when I hear Kenny G start up at 2 a.m. In this instance, my anger is perfectly fitting and rational: Mike Tyson is slighting me, that is, not taking me and my ends seriously. But is this reflective of Mike’s deep self, his strong evaluations about what’s important in life? And does any of this make any difference about whether I hold him responsible? Philosopher Dave Shoemaker discusses this and related questions.
Moral Sentiments and Moral Responsibility: An Interview with David Shoemaker (Part 1)
An interview with philosopher Dave Shoemaker about his new book, Responsibility from the Margins, that discusses how our conceptions of moral responsibility depend on, or are even constituted by, our emotional reactions to the actions, omissions, and attitudes of others.
Blaming Buried Prejudice: Neil Levy on implicit bias and moral responsibility
Science shows that though a person accused of discrimination may sincerely deny harboring any kind of prejudice, their choices and actions may have been modulated by implicit biases operating below the level of conscious intention. Are people morally responsible for such acts and attitudes?
Episode 93: Freedom and Responsibility (Strawson vs. Strawson)
On P.F. Strawson’s “Freedom and Resentment” (1960), Galen Strawson’s “The Impossibility of Moral Responsibility” (1994), and Gary Watson’s “Responsibility and the Limits of Evil: Variations on a Strawsonian Theme” (1987). With guest Tamler Sommers.
Episode 93: Freedom and Responsibility (Strawson vs. Strawson)
On P.F. Strawson’s “Freedom and Resentment” (1960), Galen Strawson’s “The Impossibility of Moral Responsibility” (1994), and Gary Watson’s “Responsibility and the Limits of Evil: Variations on a Strawsonian Theme” (1987). With guest Tamler Sommers. Learn more.
End song: “Irresistible” by New People. Download the album.
Precognition of Ep. 93: Free Will (via Strawsons)
Guest Tamler Sommers (from the Very Bad Wizards podcast) summarizes Galen Strawson’s “The Impossibility of Moral Responsibility” (1994) and his father P.F. Strawson’s “Freedom and Resentment” (1960).
Precognition of Ep. 93: Free Will (via Strawsons)
Guest Tamler Sommers (from the Very Bad Wizards podcast) summarizes Galen Strawson’s “The Impossibility of Moral Responsibility” (1994) and his father P.F. Strawson’s “Freedom and Resentment” (1960).
Topic for #93: Free Will and Moral Responsibility (Strawson Father vs. Son)
Listen now to Tamler Sommers’s summary of the two Strawson articles. On 4/6, Mark, Wes, and Seth were joined by Tamler Sommers of the Very Bad Wizards podcast to discuss the following articles: 1. P.F. Strawson’s “Freedom and Resentment” (1960) 2. Galen Strawson’s “The Impossibility of Moral Responsibility” (1994) 3. Gary Watson’s “Responsibility and the Limits of Evil: Variations on Continue Reading …