Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Ethics, Modern --- Responsibility. --- Responsibility --- Accountability --- Moral responsibility --- Obligation --- Ethics --- Supererogation

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

This book explores moral responsibility, and whether it is compatible with causal determinism. Its author, K. E. Boxer, started out with deeply incompatibilist intuitions but became dissatisfied with the arguments that she and other contemporary incompatibilists marshalled in support of this view. Rethinking Responsibility has evolved out of her search for a more adequate argument. Boxer suggests that if incompatibilists are to be in a position to provide such an argument, they must shift their attention away from metaphysics and back to what H. L. A. Hart deemed the primary sense of the concept of moral responsibility, viz., the sense of liability. To say that an agent is morally responsible for an action in this sense is to say that she satisfies the necessary causal and capacity conditions for desert of certain forms of response. If incompatibilists are to show that among those conditions is a requirement for some form of ultimate responsibility incompatible with determinism, they must first clarify their understanding of moral desert and the moral responses associated with attributions of responsibility. The book examines different possible understandings of moral liability-responsibility based on different possible accounts of the nature of moral blame, the moral desert of punishment, and the relation between desert of moral blame and desert of punishment. A focal point throughout the discussion is whether, on any of the possible understandings, moral responsibility would require agents to be ultimately responsible for their actions in a way incompatible with causal determinism. Other issues discussed include what renders a defect a moral defect or a particular criticism a moral criticism, whether moral obligations are act-governing or will-governing, the connection between the moral reactive attitudes and the retributive sentiments, the relevance of the capacity to participate in ordinary interpersonal relationships, and whether it is possible to understand the moral desert of punishment in communicative terms. Boxer concludes that incompatibilists face an unenviable choice: either they must adopt an understanding of the moral desert of punishment that many find morally problematic, or they must abandon incompatibilism.

Responsibility --- Determinism (Philosophy) --- Accountability --- Moral responsibility --- Obligation --- Ethics --- Supererogation --- Philosophy

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Published in 1785, the Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals is one of the most powerful texts in the history of ethical thought. In this book, Immanuel Kant formulates and justifies a supreme principle of morality that issues universal and unconditional moral commands. These commands receive their normative force from the fact that rational agents autonomously impose the moral law upon themselves. As such, they are laws of freedom. This volume contains the first facing-page German-English edition of Kant's Groundwork. It presents an authentic edition of the German text and a carefully revised version of Mary Gregor's acclaimed English translation, as well as editorial notes and a full bilingual index. It will be the edition of choice for any student or scholar who is not content with reading this central contribution to modern moral philosophy through the veil of English translation.

Ethics --- Duty --- Virtue --- Deontology --- Obligation --- Responsibility --- Supererogation --- Kant, Immanuel, --- Arts and Humanities --- Philosophy

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Responsibility --- -Accountability --- Moral responsibility --- Obligation --- Ethics --- Supererogation --- Addresses, essays, lectures --- Responsibility. --- -Addresses, essays, lectures --- Accountability

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Doing harm seems much harder to justify than merely allowing harm. If a boulder is rushing towards Bob, you may refuse to save Bob's life by driving your car into the path of the boulder if doing so would cost you your own life. You may not push the boulder towards Bob to save your own life. This principle--the Doctrine of Doing and Allowing--requires defence. Does the distinction between doing and allowing fall apart under scrutiny? When lives are at stake, how canit matter whether harm is done or allowed? Drawing on detailed analysis of the distinction between doing and allowing, Fiona Wooll

Responsibility. --- Applied ethics. --- Practical ethics --- Ethics --- Casuistry --- Ethical problems --- Accountability --- Moral responsibility --- Obligation --- Supererogation