What is Moral Responsibility?

PHILO-notes

21 Jun 202202:38

Summary

TLDRMoral responsibility refers to the status of being deserving of praise, blame, reward, or punishment based on one's actions or omissions, in line with moral obligations. This concept is tied to the 'reactive attitudes' like resentment, indignation, and gratitude, introduced by philosopher Peter Strawson. However, moral responsibility is distinct from causal responsibility, as only persons, not animals or inanimate objects, can be morally responsible. Philosophers debate what qualifies someone to be an appropriate target for moral attitudes and practices, with factors like personhood and maturity, such as in the case of children, playing a role.

Takeaways

😀 Moral responsibility refers to the status of deserving praise, blame, reward, or punishment for an action or omission based on moral obligations.
🤔 If an agent is morally responsible for their actions, they can be the target of certain attitudes and practices, such as resentment, indignation, gratitude, and approval.
😠 Peter Strawson referred to these attitudes as 'reactive attitudes,' which include emotions like resentment or approval.
🙌 A morally responsible agent can also be subject to practices like praise, blame, reward, and punishment.
📜 Moral responsibility differs from causal responsibility—someone can be causally responsible for an event without being morally responsible for it.
💧 For example, if a person spills water on a computer, they are both causally and morally responsible. However, if a cat spills water, the cat is causally responsible but not morally responsible.
🐱 The reason cats are not morally responsible is that they are not persons, and only persons can be held morally responsible for their actions.
👶 Not all persons are morally responsible. For instance, children are generally not considered fully responsible for their actions.
🧐 Philosophers disagree on the exact conditions under which a person is morally responsible and what makes someone an appropriate target for reactive attitudes.
⚖️ Deciding what counts as a moral obligation is a key concern in ethics, shaping our understanding of moral responsibility.

Q & A

What is moral responsibility?
-Moral responsibility is the status of being morally deserving of praise, blame, reward, or punishment for an act or omission in accordance with one's moral obligations.
How does moral responsibility differ from causal responsibility?
-Causal responsibility refers to being the cause of something happening, while moral responsibility includes being the appropriate target of attitudes like resentment or gratitude. One can be causally responsible without being morally responsible.
What are reactive attitudes according to Peter Strawson?
-Reactive attitudes, as described by Peter Strawson, are emotional responses like resentment, indignation, gratitude, and approval, which we direct toward agents who are morally responsible for their actions.
Can non-human agents, such as animals, be morally responsible?
-No, non-human agents like animals cannot be morally responsible. For example, if a cat spills water on a computer, it cannot be held morally responsible, even though it is causally responsible for the damage.
Why are some persons, such as children, not always considered morally responsible?
-Children are persons but are generally not taken to be fully responsible for their actions because they may lack the full capacity to understand the moral implications of their actions.
What role does moral obligation play in moral responsibility?
-Moral obligation determines what actions or omissions an agent is responsible for. An agent is morally responsible if they fail to meet their moral obligations.
What kind of attitudes and practices can a morally responsible agent be the target of?
-A morally responsible agent can be the target of reactive attitudes such as resentment and approval, as well as practices like praise, blame, reward, and punishment.
Can a person be causally responsible but not morally responsible? Provide an example.
-Yes, a person can be causally responsible but not morally responsible. For example, if you accidentally spill water on my computer, you are causally responsible for the damage but may not be morally responsible if it was an honest mistake.
Why is deciding what counts as morally obligatory a key concern of ethics?
-Determining what counts as morally obligatory is crucial because it defines the standards by which we judge whether someone is morally responsible for their actions.
Do all philosophers agree on what makes someone morally responsible?
-No, philosophers disagree about the conditions that make someone morally responsible. There are different views on what makes an individual an appropriate target for reactive attitudes like praise and blame.

Outlines

00:00

🤔 What is Moral Responsibility?

This paragraph introduces the concept of moral responsibility. It states that when an agent is morally responsible for their actions, those actions make them a suitable subject for certain reactions, such as resentment, indignation, gratitude, or approval. These reactions, known as reactive attitudes, along with practices like praise, blame, reward, and punishment, can be directed toward morally responsible agents. In short, moral responsibility entails deserving praise, blame, reward, or punishment based on one's moral obligations.

🧠 Distinguishing Moral and Causal Responsibility

The paragraph emphasizes the difference between moral and causal responsibility. One can be causally responsible for an event without being morally responsible. For example, if a person spills water on a computer, they are both causally and morally responsible, making them open to blame. However, if a cat causes the same spill, the cat is causally responsible but not morally responsible, as it is not a suitable target for reactive attitudes like resentment. Only persons can be morally responsible, though not all persons—such as children—are fully morally accountable.

🗣 Philosophical Debate on Moral Responsibility

This section highlights that not all persons are morally responsible, such as children, who are generally not considered fully accountable for their actions. It notes that philosophers disagree on what conditions make someone morally responsible, especially in determining what makes a person the proper target for attitudes like praise or blame. The paragraph underlines that the criteria for moral responsibility are a central point of debate in ethics.

Mindmap

Keywords

💡Moral Responsibility

Moral responsibility refers to the status of being deserving of praise, blame, reward, or punishment for an action or omission. It is central to the video's discussion as it highlights the idea that only certain agents can be held accountable based on their moral obligations. An example from the script is when the speaker distinguishes moral responsibility from causal responsibility, explaining that moral responsibility depends on moral obligations.

💡Causal Responsibility

Causal responsibility refers to the idea that someone or something can cause an event or consequence but may not necessarily be morally responsible for it. The video contrasts this with moral responsibility, using the example of a cat spilling water on a computer. The cat is causally responsible for the damage but not morally responsible.

💡Reactive Attitudes

Reactive attitudes are emotional responses such as resentment, indignation, gratitude, and approval that are directed at agents who are seen as morally responsible for their actions. These attitudes are crucial in determining whether someone deserves praise or blame, as discussed in the video. Peter Strawson coined this term, and it is used to explain how we emotionally respond to morally responsible agents.

💡Praise and Blame

Praise and blame are practices related to moral responsibility. A morally responsible agent can be praised for fulfilling their moral duties or blamed for failing them. The video emphasizes that these practices are tied to reactive attitudes, and an example is when it states that a person who is morally responsible may be an appropriate target for blame if they act carelessly.

💡Moral Obligations

Moral obligations are duties or actions that a person is expected to perform according to moral principles. The video ties moral responsibility to moral obligations, stating that being morally responsible involves acting in line with one's moral duties. Deciding what is morally obligatory is a key concern in ethics, as noted in the script.

💡Personhood

Personhood refers to the status of being a person, which the video claims is essential for being morally responsible. The script explains that only persons can be morally responsible because they have the capacity for understanding and fulfilling moral obligations. For example, it distinguishes persons from animals like cats, which cannot be held morally responsible.

💡Peter Strawson

Peter Strawson was a philosopher who introduced the concept of reactive attitudes in discussions of moral responsibility. His ideas are used in the video to explain how certain emotional responses are linked to holding agents morally accountable. The script refers to Strawson’s theory when it discusses how reactive attitudes like resentment or gratitude apply to morally responsible agents.

💡Indignation

Indignation is a form of reactive attitude, characterized by anger or annoyance at perceived unfairness or immoral behavior. In the context of the video, indignation is one of the emotional responses that can be directed toward someone who fails to meet moral obligations. The video uses this term to illustrate how we react emotionally to moral failures.

💡Children and Moral Responsibility

The video discusses how children, while being persons, are generally not considered fully morally responsible for their actions. This concept is important because it highlights that moral responsibility requires certain cognitive and moral capacities, which children may not fully possess. Philosophers debate when or if children become morally responsible.

💡Ethics

Ethics is the branch of philosophy that deals with questions of morality, including what actions are morally right or wrong and what makes someone morally responsible. The video ties moral responsibility to ethical concerns, noting that a key issue in ethics is determining what counts as a moral obligation, which in turn affects judgments of responsibility.

Highlights

Moral responsibility involves being an appropriate target for attitudes like resentment, gratitude, and approval.

A morally responsible agent can be the target for practices of praise, blame, reward, and punishment.

Moral responsibility refers to deserving praise, blame, reward, or punishment for actions in line with one's moral obligations.

Deciding what is morally obligatory is a central concern in ethics.

Moral responsibility should be distinguished from causal responsibility; being causally responsible doesn't imply moral responsibility.

An example of causal vs moral responsibility: if a person spills water on a computer, they are both causally and morally responsible.

If a cat spills water on a computer, the cat is causally responsible but not morally responsible.

Cats are not appropriate targets for reactive attitudes like resentment because they are not persons.

Only persons can be morally responsible for their actions.

Not all persons are morally responsible for their actions; for example, children are not generally considered fully responsible.

Philosophers disagree about the conditions under which persons are morally responsible.

Philosophers debate what makes someone an appropriate target for reactive attitudes such as praise and blame.

The concept of moral responsibility is tied to one's ability to meet moral obligations.

Reactive attitudes, as described by Peter Strawson, are emotional responses such as resentment or gratitude that presuppose moral responsibility.

Moral responsibility is based on the idea of being deserving of certain social reactions due to one's actions or omissions.