{"title":"伴随而来的无知是道德责任的借口","authors":"R. J. Hartman","doi":"10.1002/THT3.481","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Correspondence Robert J. Hartman, Philosophy, Stockholm University, Sweden. Email: roberthartman122@gmail.com Abstract Some philosophers contend that concomitant ignorance preserves moral responsibility for wrongdoing. An agent is concomitantly ignorant with respect to wrongdoing if and only if her ignorance is non-culpable, but she would freely have performed the same action if she were not ignorant. I, however, argue that concomitant ignorance excuses. I show that leading accounts of moral responsibility imply that concomitant ignorance excuses, and I debunk the view that concomitant ignorance preserves moral responsibility.","PeriodicalId":44963,"journal":{"name":"Thought-A Journal of Philosophy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/THT3.481","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Concomitant ignorance excuses from moral responsibility\",\"authors\":\"R. J. Hartman\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/THT3.481\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Correspondence Robert J. Hartman, Philosophy, Stockholm University, Sweden. Email: roberthartman122@gmail.com Abstract Some philosophers contend that concomitant ignorance preserves moral responsibility for wrongdoing. An agent is concomitantly ignorant with respect to wrongdoing if and only if her ignorance is non-culpable, but she would freely have performed the same action if she were not ignorant. I, however, argue that concomitant ignorance excuses. I show that leading accounts of moral responsibility imply that concomitant ignorance excuses, and I debunk the view that concomitant ignorance preserves moral responsibility.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44963,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Thought-A Journal of Philosophy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/THT3.481\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Thought-A Journal of Philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/THT3.481\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Thought-A Journal of Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/THT3.481","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
Robert J. Hartman,瑞典斯德哥尔摩大学哲学。一些哲学家认为,随之而来的无知保留了对不法行为的道德责任。当且仅当她的无知是无罪的,行为人对不法行为是伴随无知的,但如果她不无知,她会自由地做出同样的行为。然而,我认为随之而来的无知是借口。我指出,关于道德责任的主要论述暗示,伴随而来的无知可以作为借口,我还驳斥了伴随而来的无知可以维护道德责任的观点。
Concomitant ignorance excuses from moral responsibility
Correspondence Robert J. Hartman, Philosophy, Stockholm University, Sweden. Email: roberthartman122@gmail.com Abstract Some philosophers contend that concomitant ignorance preserves moral responsibility for wrongdoing. An agent is concomitantly ignorant with respect to wrongdoing if and only if her ignorance is non-culpable, but she would freely have performed the same action if she were not ignorant. I, however, argue that concomitant ignorance excuses. I show that leading accounts of moral responsibility imply that concomitant ignorance excuses, and I debunk the view that concomitant ignorance preserves moral responsibility.
期刊介绍:
Thought: A Journal of Philosophy is dedicated to the publication of short (of less than 4500 words), original, philosophical papers in the following areas: Logic, Philosophy of Maths, Philosophy of Mind, Epistemology, Philosophy of Language, Metaphysics, and Value Theory. All published papers will be analytic in style. We intend that readers of Thought will be exposed to the most central and significant issues and positions in contemporary philosophy that fall under its remit. We will publish only papers that exemplify the highest standard of clarity. Thought aims to give a response to all authors within eight weeks of submission. Thought employs a triple-blind review system: the author''s identity is not revealed to the editors and referees, and the referee''s identity is not revealed to the author. Every submitted paper is appraised by the Subject Editor of the relevant subject area. Papers that pass to the editors are read by at least two experts in the relevant subject area.