Combining Texts

Ideas for 'God and Human Attributes', 'Causation and Laws of Nature' and 'Against Liberalism'

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     choose another area for these texts

display all the ideas for this combination of texts


8 ideas

22. Metaethics / A. Ethics Foundations / 1. Nature of Ethics / g. Moral responsibility
Evil people may not be autonomously aware, if they misjudge the situation [Kekes]
     Full Idea: Agents who perform evil nonautonomously do not know what they are doing, because they have made a mistake in understanding or evaluating their own conduct.
     From: John Kekes (Against Liberalism [1997], 02.4)
     A reaction: So while liberals say that true evil must be autonomous, Kekes says it may result from factual or evaluative error, for which people are also responsible.
Ought implies can means moral responsibility needs autonomy [Kekes]
     Full Idea: Ought implies can translates into the claim that only autonomous agents are morally responsible.
     From: John Kekes (Against Liberalism [1997], 03.3)
     A reaction: Since Kekes identifies autonomy as the key to liberalism, he sees this also as a basic liberal claim (which he rejects). I ought to ring my mother, but my phone is broken (so I ought not to ring my mother?)..
Why should moral responsibility depend on autonomy, rather than social role or experience? [Kekes]
     Full Idea: Why should moral responsibility be made to depend on autonomy, rather than on intelligence, education, social role, experience, or whatever?
     From: John Kekes (Against Liberalism [1997], 03.3)
     A reaction: Social role seems a particularly good one to cite. 'I didn't really understand what I was doing.' 'But it's your job to understand!'
Moral and causal responsibility are not clearly distinct [Kekes]
     Full Idea: Moral and causal responsibility cannot be distinguished as clearly as the liberal strategy requires.
     From: John Kekes (Against Liberalism [1997], 03.2)
     A reaction: I take assessment to be a two-stage operation. It is usually easy to assign causal responsibility. Moral responsibiity is quite different. Our negligence can make us morally responsible for an event we didn’t cause.
Morality should aim to prevent all evil actions, not just autonomous ones [Kekes]
     Full Idea: If one main task of morality is to prevent evil, then morality must be concerned with all evil-producing actions, not just autonomous ones.
     From: John Kekes (Against Liberalism [1997], 03.3)
     A reaction: Hm. Is placing a railing next to a flight of steps a moral action? Possibly.
Much human evil is not autonomous, so moral responsibility need not be autonomous [Kekes]
     Full Idea: If much evil is due to nonautonomous actions, then liberals cannot be right in idenitfying the domain of moral responsibility with the domain of autonomy.
     From: John Kekes (Against Liberalism [1997], 02.1)
     A reaction: One might evade this anti-liberal thought by making responsibility directly proportional to degree of autonomy. Then the only counterexample would be genuine immorality that is entirely non-autonomous, but is there such a thing?
Effects show the existence of moral responsibility, and mental states show the degree [Kekes]
     Full Idea: Psychological states are relevant to the degree of an agent's moral responsibility, while the effects of their actions are relevant to whether the agents are liable to moral responsibility.
     From: John Kekes (Against Liberalism [1997], 03.5)
     A reaction: He has previously offered a problem case for this, where someone's social role makes them fully responsible whatever their mental state. I still think his distinction is helpful. 1) Whose fault is it, then 2) How far are they to blame? Normal practice.
22. Metaethics / A. Ethics Foundations / 2. Source of Ethics / e. Human nature
Liberals assume people are naturally free, equal, rational, and morally good [Kekes]
     Full Idea: The view of human nature at the core of the liberal faith is that human beings are by their nature free, equal, rational, and morally good.
     From: John Kekes (Against Liberalism [1997], 02.5)
     A reaction: These four claims are quite distinct, and should be evaluated separately. I think I'm something of a liberal, but I don't really accept any of them. Hm. I just want all people to have these attributes.