This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: Moral Luck How can the extent to which someone acts rightly or wrongly be even partially settled by stuff outside her control? How can it be the case that how you are to be morally assessed depends on how things turn out, and on features of your character that are just not up to you? Shouldn’t we stop judging people on consequences, if consequences aren’t up to us? Three Principles are in Conflict 1. The Control Principle : We can only be held morally responsible for things that are within our control. 2. Moral Practice : We often, and rightly, hold ourselves and others morally responsible for the consequences of our/their actions. 3. Fact about the World : The consequences of our actions are to a large extent not within our control. make sure you see that those are inconsistent. Reasons why we cannot come to a certain consensus Well, we just can't give up #3. You can disagree with Nagel about some of his examples. (In particular, if you believe the agent causation view of free will, or at least examples....
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 12/20/2010 for the course PHIL 1101 taught by Professor Weatherson,b during the Spring '06 term at Cornell.
- Spring '06