Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T00:56:53.106Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Why value values?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2018

Samuel Murray
Samuel Murray*
Affiliation:
Philosophy Department, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556. smurray8@nd.eduhttps://philosophy.nd.edu/people/graduate-students/sam-murray/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Doris argues that an agent is responsible for her behavior only if that behavior expresses (a relevant subset of) the agent's values. This view has problems explaining responsibility for mistakes or episodes of forgetfulness. These problems highlight a conceptual problem with Doris's theory of responsible agency and give us reasons to prefer an alternative (non-valuational) theory of responsible agency.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 41 , 2018 , e54
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ahrens, M. (2016) Home fires involving cooking equipment. NFPA Fire Analysis and Research.Google Scholar
Amaya, S. (2013) Slips. Noûs 47(3):559–76.Google Scholar
Amaya, S. (2015) The argument from slips. In: Agency, freedom, and moral responsibility, ed. Buckareff, A., Moya, C. & Rosell, S., pp. 13–29. Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Amaya, S. (2016) Slip-proof actions. In: Time and the philosophy of action, ed. Altshuler, R. & Sigrist, M. J., pp. 21–36. Routledge.Google Scholar
Bratman, M. (2000) Valuing and the will. Philosophical Perspectives 14:249–65.Google Scholar
Doris, J. M. (2015b). Talking to our selves: Reflection, ignorance, and agency. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fischer, J. M. & Ravizza, M. (1998) Responsibility and control: A theory of moral responsibility. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Frankfurt, H. (1988) The importance of what we care about. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hall, L., Johansson, P. & Strandberg, T. (2012) Lifting the veil of morality: Choice blindness and attitude reversals on a self-transforming survey. PLoS ONE 7(9):e45457. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0045457.Google Scholar
Murray, S. (2017) Responsibility and vigilance. Philosophical Studies 174(2):507–27.Google Scholar
Nelkin, D. K. (2008) Responsibility and rational abilities: Defending an asymmetrical view. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 89(4):497–515.Google Scholar
Null, J. (2016) Heatstroke deaths of children in vehicles. Available at: http://noheatstroke.org.Google Scholar
Vargas, M. (2013) Building better beings: A theory of moral responsibility. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Watson, G. (1975) Free agency. Journal of Philosophy 72(8):205–220.Google Scholar
Weingarten, G. (2009) Fatal distraction. The Washington Post, March 8, 2009. Available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/magazine/fatal-distraction-forgetting-a-child-in-thebackseat-of-a-car-is-a-horrifying-mistake-is-it-a-crime/2014/06/16/8ae0fe3a-f580-11e3-a3a5-42be35962a52_story.html?utm_term=.726005cd2fcb.Google Scholar
Wolf, S. (1990) Freedom within reason. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar