Are Our Moral Responsibility Practices Justified? Wittgenstein, Strawson and Justification in ‘Freedom and Resentment’ (, British Journal for the History of . Strawson made a contribution to the free will versus determinism discussions by pointing out that whatever the deep metaphysical . Freedom and Resentment. compatibilist account of moral responsibility, the themes covered in “Freedom and. Resentment” extend beyond the free will debate. Strawson.

Author: Vibei Maujora
Country: Gabon
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Business
Published (Last): 19 April 2015
Pages: 407
PDF File Size: 6.46 Mb
ePub File Size: 13.54 Mb
ISBN: 582-1-16799-186-4
Downloads: 94476
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Tujinn

Part Two – Knowledge.

Strawson therefore holds that it is myth to suppose that we can locate a level of claim on the basis of which we can defend the validity of our application of physical resentmemt concepts.

Second, Aristotle proposes an epistemic condition: Strawson also argues that facts and states of affairs should not be regarded as things in the world.

Part 3 attempts to identify and diffuse the impulse to seek a justification for holding agents responsible. He was a highly cultured man, with a passion for literature, especially poetry, large amounts of which he could recite and which he also wrote. There are uses which Russell’s theory does not fit because the phenomenon is simply more complex than Russell allowed. Strawson’s criticisms were taken by most people to have fatally wounded Austin’s theory.

The first is what he calls the no-ownership view. Strawson develops a modest transcendental argument for the legitimacy of our moral responsibility practices. In the end, he arrived at a kind of Compatibilist or, as he says, Optimist conclusion.

Strawson therefore investigates the idea of a creature with only auditory experience, the assumption being that auditory experience on its own is non-spatial. Strawson did not seek to make disciples, nor did he write too much by way of defence of his views against critics except, as it were, when he had to. He raises several worries about the Strawsonian view that moral responsibility consists in susceptibility to the reactive attitudes and claims that this view at best supports only an etiolated interpretation of the idea that moral responsibility is essentially interpersonal.

Nichols, Shaun and Knobe, Joshua, Concerns of this sort have often motivated reflection on moral responsibility. Though versions of the consequentialist view have continued to garner support Smart; Frankena Another, theological determinismidentifies those conditions as being the nature and will of God.


Philosophical ExplanationsCambridge, MA: Freedom and ResponsibilityPrinceton: How to join Forgot your password?

In a more recent terminology, Strawson holds that perception involves the tsrawson in us of experiences having objective representational content, and that there can be hallucinations resentmenr a similar content but which are not properly perceptual because the complex causal requirements for being perceptual are not met.

His first post after the war was at Bangor, in Wales, strawsoj, after winning the prestigious John Locke Prize in Oxford a prize awarded on the basis of a written examination to philosophy graduates in Oxford he received an appointment at University College Oxford, which made him a Fellow in The human commitment to participation in ordinary inter-personal relationships is, I think, too thoroughgoing and deeply rooted for us to take seriously the thought that a general theoretical conviction resntment so change our world that, in strawaon, there were no longer any such things as inter-personal relationships as we normally understand them; and being involved in inter-personal relationships as we normally understand them precisely is being exposed to the range of reactive attitudes and feelings that is in question.

In the first four chapters Strawson’s focus is on our ability to refer to and think about items in our environment, including ourselves. Strawson was then called up for military service and belongs to that generation of British philosophers, including Ayer, Hampshire, Hare, Hart and Wollheim, who saw service in the Second World War. Strawson expresses agreement stdawson some of his earlier critics in particular Stroud that transcendental arguments are problematic as anti-sceptical devices, and suggests instead that scepticism can be set aside because no-one is persuaded by sceptical arguments.

Recognition and Resentment in the Confucian Analects.

However, most understood the inner attitudes and emotions involved to rest on a more fundamental freedkm judgment about the agent’s being responsible.

Merit, Meaning, and Human Bondage: Confucian ethics integrates a nuanced and realistic moral psychology with the normatively oriented project of self-cultivation necessary for dismantling complex negative emotions in promoting a condition of humane benevolence that is oriented toward others and achieved through self-cultivation.

Freedom and Resentment

In Strawson published his second book Individuals. Strawson draws an epistemological conclusion from this. Strawson’s aim is to isolate and defend what is valuable and worth preserving as opposed to those aspects he sees as the dubious in Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. Relaxed pluralism might be reasonable, and in the face of it supporters of reduction need to defend their approach, but it raises more issues than Strawson seems to allow.


For the real question is not a question about what we actually do, or why we do it. Against this background, a distinction will be drawn between two conceptions of moral responsibility that have exerted considerable influence on subsequent thinkers.

Freedom and Resentment | work by Strawson |

Second, Strawson claims that Grice’s attempt to spell out the right causal chain by picking it out via examples is circular, and he replaces it by invoking notions of match and range. Thomas Hobbes —David Hume —and John Stuart Mill — are, along with the Stoics, representatives of this view. Reprinted in Fischer and Ravizza, Four Views on Free WillOxford: Under the hypothesis that every attribution of responsibility rests on the fact that an expectation has been breached, the author proposes to understand expectations as standards adopted by a community to evaluate specific events and allow the members of the community to search for an explanation of the events which breach expectations.

It is a recurring theme in, or perhaps a recurring part of the method of, Strawson’s philosophical discussion of language that some aspects of language are more or less obvious to us. In the first part of it Strawson presents a revised version of his account of the normal subject-predicate distinction, and also presents a partial theory of one particular case of subject expressions, namely proper names.

Free WillIndianapolis: No consensus about the assessment of Strawson’s proposal has emerged, the reason being that there has still been no very general interest in the subject-predicate distinction. Again, no consensus has emerged about this highly srawson way to think about xtrawson.