Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Blame cannot essentially implicate interpersonal relation... — Carmelics
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Blame cannot essentially implicate interpersonal relationships.

    Moral Responsibility
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    2 reasons for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Strawson's reactive attitudes like indignation are responses to the quality of will expressed toward *persons as such*, not toward particular relational partners.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If blame tracks moral address to persons qua rational agents, its essential structure is agent-relative to humanity, not to dyadic interpersonal bonds.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Cases of stranger-blame confirm this: we hold car thieves accountable by treating them as members of the moral community, not as participants in our personal relationship.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.T.M. Scanlon's buck-passing account grounds blame in the judgment that an agent's will impairs reasons for attitudes—a purely normative relation independent of personal history.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Angela Smith's reasons-responsiveness framework locates blame in rational self-governance, which is a property of agency itself rather than a property of relational standing.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If the constitutive basis of blame is agential rational competence rather than relational connection, interpersonal relationships are at most causal triggers, not essential conditions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Many cases of wrongdoing involve strangers (e.g., most car thefts, where the victim does not know the criminal).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.It still seems possible to blame those with whom we have no standing relationship.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Moral Responsibility

    Related

    Angela Smith's reasons-responsiveness framework locates blame in rational self-g...Cases of stranger-blame confirm this: we hold car thieves accountable by treatin...If blame tracks moral address to persons qua rational agents, its essential stru...If the constitutive basis of blame is agential rational competence rather than r...
    +4 moreShow less
    It still seems possible to blame those with whom we have no standing relationshi...Many cases of wrongdoing involve strangers (e.g., most car thefts, where the vic...Strawson's reactive attitudes like indignation are responses to the quality of w...T.M. Scanlon's buck-passing account grounds blame in the judgment that an agent'...

    Similar

    Impartiality requires that no personal relationship confers additional...76%No action within human relationships can be stopped or subsequently un...74%Identification does not implicate an individual in either the intentio...74%The relationship with Joe is impaired74%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: blame
    View source passageHide passage
    Susan Wolf (2011) has also argued that in some cases, such as the case of a hot-headed but ultimately loving family, it seems that you can blame another without taking yourself to have impairments in your relationship or attendant reasons to revise your intentions or attitudes towards that person. The characteristic features of Scanlon’s interpretation of blame, then, seem to be unnecessary. More recently, Sher (2013) has argued that Scanlon’s emphasis on relationships is problematic. After all,
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (2 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit