In other words, an agent is responsible, if and only if it is appropriate for us to hold her responsible, or accountable, via the reactive attitudes. We expect others to meet the Basic Demand, "the demand for goodwill or regard which is reflected in ordinary reactive attitudes" p.
The Metaphysics of Free Will: In sum, Strawson attempts to turn the traditional debate on its head, for now judgments about being responsible are understood in relation to the role reactive attitudes play in the practice of holding responsible, rather than the other way around.
No great detail for this is strictly necessary, as the aim of expounding this class of factors effecting our moral practices and relationships is simply to give details for the same reason as the former class of factors.
The interpersonal emphasis characteristic of Strawson-inspired accountability models is reflected in the demand for justification though answerability theorists tend to reject a necessary connection between these demands and the reactive attitudes. This then, would suggest a possible role to be played by independent theoretical conditions on being responsible, conditions which could prove to be compatibilist or incompatibilist in nature.
According to Aristotle, a voluntary action or trait has two distinctive features.
Another, theological determinism, identifies those conditions as being the nature and will of God. Here there is no change in our attitude towards the agent, but only towards what he did.
In this regard he was one with those English-speaking philosophers who, following Ludwig Wittgensteinthought such questions were pseudo-problems to be dissolved by careful attention to actual language use.
A Theory of Determinism: When you and I enter into a direct relationship with one another, there are going to be certain attitudes we each have that are constitutive to its even being a personal relationship.
They have little control over their emotions. The self-disclosure aspect of the attributability model is reflected in emphasizing that the target of appraisal must be judgment-sensitive.
They do so because they have violated, met, or exceeded our demand for a reasonable degree of good will.
Personality and Moral Behavior, New York: If the weather is good, they feel good. This is because it is intuitive to think that people deserve the benefit of the doubt, and that there is a hazard of injustice in getting things wrong in connection with blame which does not exist in connection with praise, or at least does not exist in the same way or to the same degree.
Four Views on Free Will, Oxford: Indeed the very understanding of the kind of efficacy these expressions of our attitudes have turns on our remembering this. If holding X responsible requires the intelligibility of being able to morally address X to see X as a potential moral interlocutorthen extreme evil paradoxically disqualifies one for blame.
According to Strawson, the attitudes expressed in holding persons morally responsible are varieties of a wide range of attitudes deriving from our participation in personal relationships, e. Free Will and Reactive Attitudes: Rather, our concern is with how he is, when we form our attitudes and judgements.
Necessity, Cause, and Blame, Ithaca: The Complete Works of Aristotle: An Essay on Free Will, Princeton: They often resemble powerless victims, having their lives run by external factors. Now in the case of the former, I refer to extraneous variables other than my interaction with the agent. On the other hand, Chiropractors tend to look at healing from an inside-out perspective.
The recognition of diversity within the concept or amongst concepts of moral responsibility has generated new reflection on whether the conditions on being morally responsible are in tension with one another Nagel ; G.
Determinism does not imply that either plea is always valid, because: This highlights a main theme in Strawson--namely, that our responsibility practices are inherently social.
These examples can be classed as factors that effect an agent decisions and his inter-personal relationships but do not ascribe to the constitution of the agent. For the holder of the consequentialist view, this is a judgment that the agent exercised a form of control that could be influenced through outward expressions of praise and blame in order to curb or promote certain behaviors.
They are often proactive in their method, addressing the underlying causes of them symptoms, and altering them. On Responsibility, New York: That is, it must be up to the agent whether to perform that action or possess the trait—it cannot be compelled externally.Responsibility and the Limits of Evil Variations on a Strawsonian Theme.
Traditional Theory of Moral Responsibility Defined Does not deserve a negative reactive attitude because although it appears as though she has failed to fulfill the basic demand--. What is a reactive attitude? What bearing does it have on the problem of free will?
A theory that has attacked the validity of discussions on freedom in modern philosophy is. 1. Some Historical Background. What follows in this section is a brief outline of the origins and trajectory of reflection on moral responsibility in the Western philosophical tradition.
1. Some Historical Background. What follows in this section is a brief outline of the origins and trajectory of reflection on moral responsibility in the Western philosophical tradition. STRAWSON AND REACTIVE ATTITUDES. The Optimist: the facts as we know them (a) don't show determinism to be false, and (b) provide an adequate basis for our moral practices Here there is no change in our attitude towards the agent, but only towards what he did.
These. In which case to begin my next assertion, concerning our altered reactive attitudes, Strawson writes: “Our adoption of the objective attitude is a consequence of our viewing that agent as incapacitated in some respects from ordinary inter-personal relationships.”.Download