Moral Responsibility That Are Not Under Your Control Essay

1287 Words May 6th, 2015 null Page
What is the capacity in which things that are not under your control can affect the amount of moral responsibility that you face? For this topic, there are generally three main views that claim to answer this question, and they are each rather simple; first, there are those that think that people are only blameworthy for things that are under their control. Second, there are those who think that people are blameworthy for things that are not under their control, and lastly, there are those that restrict the second view, such that they can compromise between both views. In this paper, I will discuss the first two views only, providing arguments for the second view as well as possible counterarguments from those that think the first view is correct. Before I get into the arguments that each of the two views has, I’d like to explain more of what I’ll be talking about. Immanuel Kant can be associated with the view that “people are only blameworthy for things that are under their control,” (this statement will be referred to as the ‘condition of control’) and Thomas Nagel was one who disagreed with this view. Nagel expressed that when someone does something that depends on factors out of their control, yet we still continue to pass moral judgment on them, it can be considered “moral luck.” (Nagel, 804) This idea of moral luck comes up frequently on this topic of blameworthiness, and in the following paragraphs I will explain Nagel’s arguments against the condition of control in…

Related Documents