Advertisement

The Moral Significance of Unintentional Omission: Comparing Will-Centered and Non-will-centered Accounts of Moral Responsibility

  • Jason BenchimolEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Library of Ethics and Applied Philosophy book series (LOET, volume 27)

Abstract

It is reasonable to assume that much wrongdoing for which agents are generally thought blameworthy occurs by way of unintentional omission. In this paper, I explain why certain will-centered accounts of moral responsibility tend to struggle to provide convincing explanations of the theoretical basis for judgments of blameworthiness in cases of unintentional omission. To provide such explanations, these will-centered accounts typically rely upon a “tracing strategy”, according to which an agent’s blameworthiness for an unintentional omission necessarily presupposes that it is a casual result of some prior blameworthy intentional choice she apparently made. I argue that this sort of appeal to the tracing strategy, upon further inspection, produces distorting implications for the way we ordinarily think about the conditions of legitimate moral criticism in cases of unintentional omission. I conclude by identifying a peculiar assumption that defenders of these will-centered accounts of moral responsibility appear to adopt and that, once rejected, renders the volitionalist’s appeal to the tracing strategy unnecessary for purposes of explaining the conditions of blameworthiness for unintentional omission. The upshot of my investigation is rather modest, but it does remain unclear just what advantage, if any, will-centered accounts of moral responsibility enjoy over their rival non-will-centered accounts.

Keywords

Moral Responsibility Moral Quality Moral Significance Moral Criticism Cognitive Failure 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Angela M. Smith, Janice Moskalik, and the participants of the University of Delft Conference on Moral Responsibility, Neuroscience, Organization, and Engineering for helpful comments on both written and presented versions of this paper.

References

  1. Arpaly, Nomy. 2003. Unprincipled Virtue: An Inquiry into Moral Agency. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Dahl, Norman O. 1967. “Ought and Blameworthiness.” The Journal of Philosophy 64:418–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Feinberg, Joel. 1984. Harm to Others. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Fischer, John M., and Neal Tognazzini. 2009. “The Truth About Tracing.” Nous 43:531–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Goodin, Robert. 1986. “Responsibilities.” The Philosophical Quarterly 36:50–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Hieronymi, Pamela. 2004. “The Force and Fairness of Moral Blame.” Philosophical Perspectives 18:115–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hieronymi, Pamela. 2008. “Controlling Attitudes.” Synthese 161:357–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Levy, Neil. 2005. “The Good, the Bad and the Blameworthy.” Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 1:1–16.Google Scholar
  9. Moya, Carlos J. 2007. “Belief and Moral Responsibility.” In Intentionality, Deliberation, and Autonomy: The Action-Theoretic Basis of Practical Philosophy, edited by C. Lumer and S. Nannini. Burlington, VT: Ashgate pp. 273–287.Google Scholar
  10. Scanlon, Thomas. 1998. What We Owe to Each Other. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.Google Scholar
  11. Sher, George. 2009. Who Knew? Responsibility Without Awareness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Smith, Angela M. 2004. “Conflicting Attitudes, Moral Agency, and Conceptions of the Self.” Philosophical Topics 32:331–52.Google Scholar
  13. Smith, Angela M. 2005a. “Responsibility for Attitudes: Activity and Passivity in Mental Life.” Ethics 115:236–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Smith, Patricia G. 1990. “Contemplating Failure: The Significance of Unconscious Omission.” Philosophical Studies 59:159–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Smith, Patricia G. 2005b. “Feinberg and the Failure to Act.” Legal Theory 11:237–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Strawson, P.F. 1962. “Freedom and Resentment.” Proceedings of the British Academy 48:1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sverdlik, Steven. 1993. “Pure Negligence.” American Philosophical Quarterly 30:137–49.Google Scholar
  18. Vargas, Manuel. 2005. “The Trouble with Tracing.” Midwest Studies in Philosophy 29:269–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Wallace, R. Jay. 1994. Responsibility and the Moral Sentiments. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Wallace, R. Jay. 2002. “Scanlon’s Contractualism.” Ethics 112:429–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Watson, Gary. 2004. “Two Faces of Responsibility.” In Agency and Answerability, edited by Gary Watson, 260–88. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Zimmerman, Michael J. 1998. An Essay on Moral Responsibility. Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of WashingtonSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations