Is It Possible to Eliminate Moral Responsibility?
Is It Possible to Eliminate Moral Responsibility?
This chapter illustrates the desperation that is almost tangible in the attempts to support moral responsibility. Evidence of this desperation becomes apparent in the wide variety of distinctly different and often conflicting proposals for supporting moral responsibility. The moral responsibility system is deeply embedded in common sense, the legal system, and deeply entrenched in man’s natural strike-back emotions. Existentialists refer to concepts such as “being-for-itself” to demonstrate the great choices one makes sans constraints and conditions. Contemporary libertarians offer similar arguments, but with a hint of apprehension. Robert Kane is one such libertarian, and he rejects mystery and relies on quantum indeterminism amplified by chaos. Compatibilists, on the other hand, are united in their rejection of miracles but divided on almost everything else.
Keywords: moral responsibility system, common sense, legal system, natural strike-back emotions, existentialists, being-for-itself, contemporary libertarians, Robert Kane, quantum indeterminism, compatibilists
MIT Press Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.
