Examlex
Thomas Nagel: Moral Luck
Intuitively, people should not be condemned for things that are due to factors beyond their control. Nagel argues, however, that there seem to be many instances of moral luck. Cases of moral luck occur when what someone does depends on factors beyond her control, yet we continue to treat her as the proper object of moral assessment. For example, we condemn the drunk driver who hits a pedestrian far more harshly than the one who merely drives off the road, even though the fact of whether a pedestrian is present is beyond the driver's control.
Nagel distinguishes among four different sources of moral luck. Constitutive luck concerns what kind of person one is, in terms of one's inclinations and temperament. Another category of luck - circumstantial luck - encompasses the circumstances one happens to be in, and the kinds of problems one faces. A third kind of luck - causal luck - concerns how one is determined by antecedent circumstances. And a final kind of luck - resultant luck - deals with the consequences of one's actions and projects, like the case of our drunk driver.
When we take all four of these types of luck into account, Nagel argues, "nothing or almost nothing about what a person does seems to be under his control." Yet, we continue morally judging people for their actions. Nagel argues that this paradox arises from our concepts of agency and events. On the one hand, the idea that we are agents is incompatible with the view that we are mere things, and that our actions are mere events. Yet, as we learn more about the causes of our actions and their consequences, we seem forced to accept the view that we are indeed things and our actions are events. Nonetheless, Nagel claims that we can't help but feel moral emotions like pride and guilt about our own actions. Ultimately, Nagel concludes, the problem of moral luck does not admit of a satisfactory solution; it is the irreconcilable clash of the objective and subjective points of view
-Nagel argues most believe that two people ought not to be assessed in morally different ways if the only differences between them are factors beyond their control.
Authentic Leadership
A leadership style characterized by the leader's genuine self-expression, transparency, and consistency, aimed at fostering trust and respect from followers.
Psychological Capacities
The mental abilities and processes related to understanding, adapting to, and navigating one's environment, including emotional intelligence, resilience, and cognitive functions.
Authentic Leadership
A leadership style that emphasizes being genuine and transparent in one’s leadership role, encouraging trust and integrity.
Catalyst for Change
An individual or event that precipitates or accelerates significant changes or transformations within an organization or community.
Q12: Rachels claims that moral skeptics attack the
Q13: Rawls conceives of the parties in the
Q14: Nagel claims that the primary object of
Q16: Rachels claims the egoist's worry that decent
Q19: Harman defines observation as:<br>A) having certain sensations
Q23: According to Rachels, the rational egoist:<br>A) cannot
Q25: In the Rescue I case, Foot claims
Q25: According to Prichard, what is the difference
Q27: What is Nagel's explanation of why we
Q30: Harman claims the functions of artifacts are