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
    Strong reasons-responsiveness cannot be required for guid... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Strong reasons-responsiveness cannot be required for guidance control.

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

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.A strongly reasons-responsive mechanism would both recognize and respond to any sufficient reason to act otherwise.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Many intuitively responsible agents—i.e., many garden variety wrongdoers—fail to attend to sufficient reasons to do otherwise.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

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

    Topics

    Moral Responsibility

    Related

    A strongly reasons-responsive mechanism would both recognize and respond to any ...Many intuitively responsible agents—i.e., many garden variety wrongdoers—fail to...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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

    Similar

    Guidance control is (partially) dependent on responsiveness to reasons...81%Reasons-responsiveness is sufficient to ground ascriptions of control ...80%Moral responsibility requires guidance control over one's behavior.77%The sort of control necessarily associated with moral responsibility f...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted3/3 agreementValid
    SEP: moral-responsibility
    Fischer and Ravizza (1998)
    View source passageHide passage
    Fischer and Ravizza thus arrive at the following provisional conclusion: “relatively clear cases of moral responsibility”—that is, those in which an agent is not hypnotized, etc.—are distinguished by the fact that “an agent exhibits guidance control of an action insofar as the mechanism that actually issues in the action is his own, reasons-responsive mechanism” (1998: 39). But how responsive to reasons does an agent’s mechanism need to be for that agent to have the type of control over his behavior associated with moral responsibility? A strongly reasons-responsive mechanism would both recogn...
    Extraction notes

    Validity: The premises are explicitly stated in the passage and together they rationally support (not attack) the conclusion that strong reasons-responsiveness cannot be required for guidance control, since many responsible agents fail to meet its demanding standard—though the argument type is mislabeled as "attack," the premises do logically support the stated conclusion and the argument is clearly present in the passage.

    Confidence: Clearly stated argument in the text.

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    1 (0 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit