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
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Grounding remedial responsibility in causal contribution conflates outcome responsibility with agent-regret, a distinction Bernard Williams explicitly draws to resist moral luck's punitive implications.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Causal contribution legitimately grounds repair duties independent of regret: breaking someone's vase creates restoration obligations regardless of feelings.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Williams's distinction doesn't eliminate moral luck—agent-regret itself depends on luck in moral sensibilities and emotional dispositions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Remedial responsibility requires some causal nexus; divorcing it from causation makes repair duties arbitrary and disconnected from actual harm.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Williams distinguishes agent-regret (personal felt responsibility) from outcome responsibility (causal involvement), marking different moral categories.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Grounding remedial duty solely in causal contribution makes moral obligations hostage to luck, punishing agents for unchosen consequences.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Only agent-regret requires voluntary control; outcome responsibility can attach to purely accidental causal roles, conflating distinct accountability bases.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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