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
    The characteristic features of Scanlon's interpretation o... — Carmelics
    Home/Moral Responsibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The characteristic features of Scanlon's interpretation of blame are unnecessary.

    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 framework shows blame is constituted by feelings like resentment and indignation, not relational revision intentions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If resentment can occur without any intention to revise relationship attitudes, then Scanlon's relational revision condition is not necessary for blame.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Empirical cases of blame toward strangers or historical figures confirm blame occurs absent any ongoing relationship to impair or revise.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Fischer and Ravizza's reasons-responsiveness account locates blame in judgments about an agent's control, not in the blamer's relational intentions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A theory of blame whose conditions can be fully satisfied without Scanlon's relational features is explanatorily sufficient, rendering those features unnecessary.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.In some cases, such as a hot-headed but ultimately loving family, you can blame another without taking yourself to have impairments in your relationship with that person.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.In such cases, you also do not take yourself to have attendant reasons to revise your intentions or attitudes towards that person.
      ?

      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

    A theory of blame whose conditions can be fully satisfied without Scanlon's rela...Empirical cases of blame toward strangers or historical figures confirm blame oc...Fischer and Ravizza's reasons-responsiveness account locates blame in judgments ...If resentment can occur without any intention to revise relationship attitudes, ...
    +3 moreShow less
    In some cases, such as a hot-headed but ultimately loving family, you can blame ...In such cases, you also do not take yourself to have attendant reasons to revise...Strawson's reactive attitudes framework shows blame is constituted by feelings l...

    Similar

    Sher's theory of blame is inadequate because it is too sanitized.83%Reactive emotions imbue the judgment with expressive significance char...80%Emotions are merely concomitant with blame rather than constitutive of...80%A desire component is not part of what constitutes blame.80%

    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