Without control as a criterion, collective responsibility becomes indistinguishable from strict liability, which most moral theorists reject as a basis for genuine blameworthiness rather than mere compensatory obligation.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

1 reason for

1 reason against

Reasons For

1 perspective

Reason for

1 perspective

Reason against

Based on where you are in your exploration

Compensatory obligation(as used in ethics and law): A duty to make up for or repay someone for harm or loss you've caused, regardless of whether you're morally blamed.
Control(One of six conceptions of objectivity critiqued by feminists): 'Objective' knowledge of an object is attained by controlling it, especially by experimental manipulation, and observing the regularities it manifests under control
Strict liability(as used in ethics and law): A legal and moral concept where someone can be held responsible for harm they caused, even if they didn't intend it and weren't careless.
blameworthiness(Offered as an alternative to noncompliance with reasons as the basis for blame): A condition that may be sufficiently explained by an act stemming from a character from which certain concerns or motivations are absent.
collective responsibility(Used to motivate inclusion of non-Kantian frameworks in moral theorizing): A form of responsibility attributed to groups rather than solely to individuals; the passage treats it as requiring non-Kantian or expanded notions of moral responsibility
criterion(as used in philosophy to describe a test for whether an idea works): A standard or rule used to decide whether something counts as true or valid.

1 topic