Abstract
In this paper I explore various themes in Alfred Mele's Manipulated Agents: A Window to Moral Responsibility (OUP 2019). I develop four points. First, I argue that Mele's historical requirement for moral responsibility for developed morally responsible agents should be coupled with a nonhistorical theory of initially developing agents (like toddlers). Second, I argue that one might resist Mele's negative historical requirement (wherein agents must lack certain responsibility-defeating histories) with a minimal positive historical requirement according to which an agent has a history wherein she did not undergo any responsibility-defeating events, like being severely manipulated.Third, I also explore the idea that one who defended a nonhistorical view, such as Harry Frankfurt's, might rely on a different conception of what moral responsibility is. This might explain why some resisting Mele would not have the intuition that in certain cases a manipulated agent is not responsible. Finally, I question how we should think of the role of intuition in thought experiments figuring centrally in Mele's work.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 285-298 |
Number of pages | 14 |
Journal | Criminal Law and Philosophy |
Volume | 15 |
Issue number | 2 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Jul 2021 |
Keywords
- Alfred Mele
- Externalism
- Free will
- Grandmothers
- Internalism
- Manipulation
- Moral responsibility
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Philosophy
- Law