Taking Responsibility for Negligence and Non-negligence

Criminal Law and Philosophy 14 (1):113-134 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Negligence reminds us that we often do and cause things unawares, occasionally with grave results. Given the lack of foresight and intention, some authors argue that people should not be judged culpable for negligence. This paper offers a contrasting view. It argues that gaining control is itself a fundamental responsibility, with both collective and individual elements. The paper underlines both sides, focussing on how they relate as we ascribe responsibility or culpability. Following the introduction, Section 2 argues that conscious awareness is neither necessary nor sufficient for control. Control is not a property of deliberate choice, so much as a practical achievement. Section 3 stresses the collective aspects of non-negligence: creating knowledge about risks, structuring environments to guard against them, and developing standards of care. Failings in the collective task, rather than lack of individual control, mean it can often be unfair to pin culpability on a single individual. Section 4 suggests that a basic duty of a responsible person is to acknowledge the ways in which we may do more or less than we mean to, often in ways that create risks. It then sketches an approach to culpability as part of a collective exercise: as we take responsibility for standards of care, and for our own and others’ agency.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

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

Nobody’s Perfect: Moral Responsibility in Negligence.Ori Herstein - 2019 - Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 31 (1):109-125.
Epistemic Responsibility and Criminal Negligence.Alexander Greenberg - 2020 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 14 (1):91-111.
The Problem with Negligence.Matt King - 2009 - Social Theory and Practice 35 (4):577-595.
Responsibility in Negligence: Why the Duty of Care is Not a Duty “To Try”.Ori J. Herstein - 2010 - Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 23 (2):403-428.
The Place of the Trace: Negligence and Responsibility.Samuel Murray - 2020 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology 11 (1):39-52.
Responsibility and the Negligence Standard.Joseph Raz - 2010 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 30 (1):1-18.
A Theory of Criminal Negligence.Victor Vridar Ramraj - 1998 - Dissertation, University of Toronto (Canada)
Raz on Responsibility.Gary Watson - 2016 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 10 (3):395-409.
Many Duties of Care—Or A Duty of Care? Notes from the Underground.David Howarth - 2006 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 26 (3):449-472.
The Fault of Not Knowing.George Fletcher - 2002 - Theoretical Inquiries in Law 3 (2).
Duties of Care—Do they Really Exist?Nicholas J. McBride - 2004 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 24 (3):417-441.
Crimes of Negligence: Attempting and Succeeding. [REVIEW]Alfred R. Mele - 2012 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 6 (3):387-398.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-09-22

Downloads
53 (#295,072)

6 months
11 (#225,837)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Garrath Williams
Lancaster University