Blame, Nudging, and the Actual Moral Relationship

International Journal of Philosophical Studies 31 (1):18-35 (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

T. M. Scanlon posits a universal moral relationship in response to the worry that his relational approach to blame cannot answer the question of how strangers can fittingly blame one another. However, commentators have noted that appealing to universal moral standards seems to explicitly deviate from a relational approach’s basis in actual relationship norms. This paper argues that Scanlon’s idea of a moral relationship can nevertheless provide a basis for response to the problem of strangers if we recognize that actual and ideal moral relationships both play a role within the relational approach. An interesting consequence of this recognition is that it seems to undermine the moral relationship’s universality. However, a presumptive case for assuming the relationship exists even between strangers can be found in seeing our blaming practices as akin to public policy nudges, where blame operates like an opt-out choice architecture with respect to the moral relationship. On this understanding, though the moral relationship is escapable, individuals are naturally encouraged to participate through the expression of interpersonal attitudes that communicate relational norms and expectations.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,100

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Scanlon’s Theories of Blame.Eugene Chislenko - 2020 - Journal of Value Inquiry 54 (3):371-386.
The Problem of Blame: Making Sense of Moral Anger.Kelly McCormick - 2022 - New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press.
Luck, blame, and desert.Michael Cholbi - 2014 - Philosophical Studies 169 (2):313-332.
Salience, Imagination, and Moral Luck.Nathan Stout - 2017 - Philosophical Papers 46 (2):297-313.
Blame: Taking it Seriously.Michelle Mason - 2011 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 83 (2):473-481.
Blame, Communication, and Morally Responsible Agency.Coleen Macnamara - 2015 - In Randolph Clarke, Michael McKenna & Angela Smith (eds.), The Nature of Moral Responsibility: New Essays. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 211-236.
Self-Blame and Moral Responsibility.Andreas Carlsson (ed.) - 2022 - New York, USA: Cambridge University Press.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-02-03

Downloads
35 (#457,473)

6 months
21 (#126,579)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Nicholas Sars
Santa Clara University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Moral dimensions: permissibility, meaning, blame.Thomas Scanlon - 2008 - Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Famine, affluence, and morality.Peter Singer - 1972 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 1 (3):229-243.
Two concepts of rules.John Rawls - 1955 - Philosophical Review 64 (1):3-32.
The ethics of nudging: An overview.Andreas T. Schmidt & Bart Engelen - 2020 - Philosophy Compass 15 (4):e12658.

View all 17 references / Add more references