Addiction, Self-responsibility, and the Importance of Choice
2. Teach your children to acknowledge their responsibilities towards themselves and others and honor their obligations. Make them accountable for their actions and accept the reward and punishment that come with it.
which allow the abdication of self-responsibility to The Program, ..
Notably, some accounts of responsibility make no essentialreference to the reactive attitudes or their accompanyingpractices. Perhaps the clearest example of these are so-called“ledger” views of moral responsibility. According to suchviews, the practice of ascribing responsibility involves assigning acredit or debit to a metaphorical ledger associated with each agent(Feinberg: 30–1; Glover: 64; Zimmerman: 38–9; and discussion of suchviews in Watson 1987: 261–2; and Fischer & Ravizza 1998: 8–10,nt. 12). In other words, an agent is responsible if a fault or creditis properly attributable to her.
The issue of how best to understand the concept of moralresponsibility is important, for it can strongly influence one's viewof what, if any, philosophical problems might be associated with thenotion, and further, if there are problems, what might count as asolution. As discussed above, philosophical reflection on moralresponsibility has historically relied upon one of two broadinterpretations of the concept: 1) the merit-basedview, according to which praise or blame would be anappropriate reaction toward the candidate if and only if shemerits—in the sense of ‘deserves’—such areaction; or 2) the consequentialist view, according to whichpraise or blame would be appropriate if and only if a reaction of thissort would likely lead to a desired change in the agent and/or herbehavior. Though versions of the consequentialist view have continuedto garner support (Smart; Frankena 1963: ch. 4; Schlick 1966; Brandt1992; Dennett 1984: ch. 7; Kupperman 1991: ch. 3; and Vargas 2013: ch. 6), work in thelast 50 years on the concept of moral responsibility has increasinglyfocused on: a) offering alternative versions of the merit-based view;and b) questioning whether there is but one concept of moral responsibility.
MBA Application Essays: Self-Awareness is Key
A comprehensive theory of moral responsibility would elucidate thefollowing: (1) the concept, or idea, of moral responsibility itself;(2) the criteria for being a moral agent, i.e., one who qualifiesgenerally as an agent open to responsibility ascriptions (e.g., onlybeings possessing the general capacity to evaluate reasons for actingcan be moral agents); (3) the conditions under which the concept ofmoral responsibility is properly applied, i.e., those conditions underwhich a moral agent is responsible for a particular something (e.g., amoral agent can be responsible for an action she has performed only ifshe performed it freely, where acting freely entails the ability tohave done otherwise at the time of action); and finally 4) possibleobjects of responsibility ascriptions (e.g., actions, omissions,consequences, character traits, etc.). Although each of these will betouched upon in the discussion below (see, e.g., the brief sketch ofAristotle's account in the next section), the primary focus of thisentry is on the first component—i.e., the concept of moralresponsibility. The section immediately following this introduction isa discussion of the origin and history of Western reflection on moralresponsibility. This is followed by an overview of recent work on theconcept of moral responsibility. For further discussion of issuesassociated with moral responsibility, see the related entriesbelow.
A collection of classic essays on moral and legal responsibility
When a person performs or fails to perform a morally significantaction, we sometimes think that a particular kind of response iswarranted. Praise and blame are perhaps the most obvious forms thisreaction might take. For example, one who encounters a car accidentmay be regarded as worthy of praise for having saved a child frominside the burning car, or alternatively, one may be regarded asworthy of blame for not having used one's mobile phone to callfor help. To regard such agents as worthy of one of these reactions isto regard them as responsible for what they havedone or left undone. (These are examples of other-directed ascriptionsof responsibility. The reaction might also be self-directed, e.g., onecan recognize oneself to be blameworthy). Thus, to be morallyresponsible for something, say an action, is to be worthy of aparticular kind of reaction—praise, blame, or something akinto these—for having performed it.
Essays - The Criminal Responsibility of Psychopaths …
There is an instructive ambiguity in Aristotle's account ofresponsibility, an ambiguity that has led to competing interpretationsof his view. Aristotle aims to identify the conditions under which itis appropriate to praise or blame an agent, but it is not entirelyclear how to understand the pivotal notion of appropriateness in hisconception of responsibility. There are at least two possibilities: a)praise or blame is appropriate in the sense that the agentdeserves such a response, given his behavior and/or traits ofcharacter; or b) praise or blame is appropriate in the sense that sucha reaction is likely to bring about a desired consequence, namely animprovement in the agent's behavior and/or character. These twopossibilities may be characterized in terms of two competinginterpretations of the concept of moral responsibility: 1) themerit-based view, according to which praise or blamewould be an appropriate reaction toward the candidate if and only ifshe merits—in the sense of ‘deserves’—sucha reaction; vs. 2) the consequentialist view, according towhich praise or blame would be appropriate if and only if a reactionof this sort would likely lead to a desired change in the agent and/orher behavior.