| Description |
1 online resource |
| Contents |
Intro -- Title page -- Copyright page -- Contents -- Preface -- Introduction: A General Theory of Responsibility -- An Initial Case Study -- What's in a Name? -- Being Responsible -- An Argument in Two Keys -- Local Focus -- Roadmap -- 1. The Basic Responsibility Relation -- Symmetry in Praising and Blaming -- The Basic Responsibility Relation -- The Case for Asymmetry -- What's Next -- 2. Basic Agency -- Doers and Doings -- Where the Action Is -- Conditions on the Basic Responsibility Relation -- Why the Basic Responsibility Relation? -- Next Steps -- 3. Basic Blame and Basic Praise |
|
A Schematic Approach -- Basics of Blame (and Praise) -- Blame by Any Other Name -- Mere Grading and the Force of Blame -- Testing the Account -- Scant Praise -- The Story So Far -- 4. Basic Desert -- Are Ye Worthy? -- Deserving Blame (and Praise) -- Hard Treatment and Sanction -- What's So Bad about Being Blameworthy? -- Going without Desert -- Basic Desert and Praise -- Summing Up -- 5. Beyond Basic Responsibility -- Accounting for Different Types of Responsibility -- The Really Real Self -- Building Character -- Check Your Attitude -- The Limits of Authorship -- What Lies Beyond |
|
Conclusion: Odds and Ends -- Signposts and Exit Ramps -- Specifying Activities -- The Moral in Responsibility -- Koko, the Artist -- Coming of Age -- Compatibility Test -- Concluding Thoughts -- References -- Index |
| Summary |
We evaluate people all the time for a wide variety of activities. We blame them for miscalculations, uninspired art, and committing crimes. We praise them for detailed brushwork, a superb pass, and their acts of kindness. We accomplish things, from solving crosswords to mastering guitar solos. We bungle our endeavors, whether this is letting a friend down or burning dinner. Sometimes these deeds are morally significant, but many times they are not. Simply Responsible defends the radical proposal that the blameworthy artist is responsible in just the same way that the blameworthy thief is. We can be responsible for all kinds of different activities, from lip-synching to long division, from murders to meringues, but the relation involved, what author Matt King calls the basic responsibility relation, is the same in every case. We are responsible for the things we do first, then blameworthy or praiseworthy for having done them in light of whether they're good or bad, according to a variety of standards. Why is this a radical proposal? Firstly, because so much of the contemporary literature on moral responsibility has moralized its nature. According to most accounts, moral responsibility is either a special species of responsibility or else depends on moralized capacities. In contrast, King argues that we get a more complete and unifying picture of responsible agency from a more general theory of responsibility. Secondly, the proposal is radical due to its drastic simplicity. King foregoes many of the complications that feature in other accounts of responsibility, arguing that we can make do with less demanding theoretical elements.--provided by publisher |
| Bibliography |
Includes bibliographical references and index |
| Notes |
Description based on online resource; title from digital title page (viewed on June 28, 2023) |
| Subject |
Responsibility.
|
|
Praise.
|
|
Blame.
|
|
eulogies (documents)
|
|
Blame
|
|
Praise
|
|
Responsibility
|
|
Ethics & moral philosophy.
|
|
Philosophy.
|
| Form |
Electronic book
|
| ISBN |
0191979791 |
|
9780191979798 |
|
0192883615 |
|
9780192883612 |
|
