Moral Luck can be understood as an intuitional challenge to the Kantian claim. This is part of Hegel's claim against Kant -- that many people live moral lives because they never win the lottery or live immoral ones because they were raised in terrible ways. Late Critical Kant
What is the moral luck theory?
Williams’ aim in “Moral Luck” and much of his other work is to discredit the Kantian view of morality and to suggest that it would be best to abandon the notion of morality altogether (replacing it with the wider notion he calls the “ethical”). (See Williams, 1985, for the distinction.)
What is Kant’s Moral Philosophy?
In brief, Kant’s moral philosophy focuses on fairness and the value of the individual. His method rests on our ability to reason, our autonomy (i.e. our ability to give ourselves moral law and govern our own lives), and logical consistency.
Is morality immune to luck?
According to Moore, there is something intuitively right about morality being immune to luck, but only if we understand “luck” in the sense of “freakishness.” Further, the successful murderer is “in control” of his action in the normal sense of the word “control,” even though he doesn’t control the wind.
What is the conflict between the control principle and moral luck?
To bring out the conflict with the Control Principle even more starkly, we will understand moral luck as follows: (ML) moral luck occurs when an agent can be correctly treated as an object of moral judgment, despite the fact that a significant aspect of what he is assessed for depends on factors beyond his control.
Why is moral luck a problem?
What is moral luck?
What is constitutive luck?
How to respond to moral luck?
What are the four types of luck?
What is the second task of morality?
What is the moral assessment of a family?
See more
About this website
Does the notion of moral luck pose a problem for Kant's theory?
This is because the Kantian position is presented as entirely incompatible with the possibility of luck and this is interpreted as a serious problem for Kant (interpreted as such mainly by Aristotelian-inspired theories which claim to have a more plausible account of goodness because they are willing to accept it is ...
What is the problem of moral luck?
This, for Nagel, is the problem of moral luck: the tension between the intuition that a person's moral standing cannot be affected by luck and the possibility that luck plays an important (perhaps even essential) role in determining a person's moral standing.
What is moral luck and why do moral philosophers think it's a problem?
Moral luck occurs when factors beyond an agent's control positively affect how much praise or blame she deserves. Kinds of moral luck are differentiated by the source of lack of control such as the results of her actions, the circumstances in which she finds herself, and the way in which she is constituted.
Why is the existence of moral luck a problem for Kant?
Generating the Problem of Moral Luck and Kinds of Luck. The idea that morality is immune from luck finds inspiration in Kant: A good will is not good because of what it effects or accomplishes, because of its fitness to attain some proposed end, but only because of its volition, that is, it is good in itself…
What is Kant's view about moral luck?
Kant believed that good or bad luck should influence neither our moral judgment of a person and his actions, nor his moral assessment of himself. He would presumably have said the same about a bad will: whether it accomplishes its evil purposes is morally irrelevant.
What is moral luck theory?
Moral luck describes circumstances whereby a moral agent is assigned moral blame or praise for an action or its consequences, even if it is clear that said agent did not have full control over either the action or its consequences.
What is an example of moral luck?
Constitutive Moral Luck For example, although violent criminals seem worse than upstanding citizens, it's plausible to think that whether one is a violent criminal or an upstanding citizen depends on one's genes and the environment in which one is raised.
Why is moral luck important?
Chance plays a crucial role in moral judgment. Moral luck is a way of thinking about the relation between luck and moral accountability that recognizes that no one really knows what outcomes will result from their intentions.
What is moral luck quizlet?
Moral Luck. Treating people as objects of moral judgement (i.e. giving them moral praise or blame) even when what they do depends on factors out of their control.
What is the luck argument?
The luck argument (Haji 1999, 2001; Hobart 1934; Hume 2000; Mele 1999a, b, 2006; van Inwagen 2000) seeks to regiment these intuitions about luck and control into a rigorous argument that purports to show that free will and moral responsibility are incompatible with indeterminism.
Why is moral luck paradoxical?
The paradox arises because once we become aware of the fact that all of what we do depends, at least partially, on factors beyond our control-many of which are due to dumb luck-our notion of responsible agency seems to lack application, and not because we are imposing on it "an arbitrary external requirement" (Nagel ...
Summary Of Nagel's Theory Of Moral Luck - 1199 Words | Cram
This does not yet constitute bad moral luck. For it to be bad moral luck, it must be taken a step further; if the driver had been looking down at their phone, not watching the road, and that negligence resulted in the death of the dog, the driver will not only feel guilty, but will blame themselves for the death.
Moral Luck In Thomas Nagel's View Of Moral Luck | 123 Help Me
Plato's Moral Psychology I argue that Plato's psychological theories are motivated by concerns he had about moral theory. In particular, Plato rejects the modern account of rationality as the maximization of subjectively evaluated self-interest because, had he adopted such an account, his theory of justice would be subject to criticisms which he holds are fatal to the contractarian theory of ...
critical summary of Moral Luck by Thomas Nagel - Essay - 1871 words
Nagel's conclusion, set against Kant, is that "actual results influence culpability or esteem in a large class of unquestionably ethical cases ranging from negligence to political choice" (452).He adds that "one can say in advance that the moral verdict will depend on the results" (452). But if it seems irrational to find that a truck-driver's negligence suddenly becomes more culpable on the ...
Thomas Nagel Moral Luck Summary - Internet Public Library
One of the objections which I consider to be of strength is one regarding the over flexibility of the sanction principle. The in-built nature of utilitarianism as a theory, fails to impose plausible corrective consequences to those actions which do not comply with the stipulated rules of the moral theory.
Moral Luck by Thomas Nagel (1979)
1 Moral Luck by Thomas Nagel (1979) Kant believed that good or bad luck should influence neither our moral judgment of a person and his actions, nor his moral assessment of himself.
What is the argument for Moral Luck?
Williams’ aim in “Moral Luck” and much of his other work is to discredit the Kantian view of morality and to suggest that it would be best to abandon the notion of morality altogether (re placing it with the wider notion he calls the “ethical”). (See Williams, 1985, for the distinction.)
What is moral luck?
Moral Luck. A case of moral luck occurs whenever luck makes a moral difference. The problem of moral luck arises from a clash between the apparently widely held intuition that cases of moral luck should not occur with the fact that it is arguably impossible to prevent such cases from arising. The literature on moral luck began in earnest in ...
What are the two main papers in Moral Luck?
The two main papers discussed in this article by Nagel and Williams, both entitled “Moral Luck,” were originally published in The Aristotelian Society Supplementary, Volume 1, 1976. Revised versions of both papers were published as chapters of Williams (1981) and Nagel (1979). The revised versions of these papers are also included in an excellent anthology edited by Daniel Statman (1993). Althought these two papers by Nagel and Williams started the discussion of the problem of moral luck using the phrase “moral luck,” the relevant problem has been discussed before. See, for instance, Joel Feinberg (1962).
What is constitutive luck?
The notion of constitutive luck illustrates the difficulty of the problem of moral luck. Our temptation is to avoid the other sorts of luck by focusing on what the person really is. In this way, we try to discount worries about the luck that affects the way our actions turn out or the luck that places us in situations in which we make unfortunate decisions. We focus on the core of the person, on his or her character. But on reaching that core, we are disappointed to find that luck has been at work there too. The trouble is that there is nowhere further to retreat when we are at the level of moral character. If we retreat further, there is no person left to morally assess. Nagel concludes that “in a sense the problem has no solution” (1993, p. 68). The cost of not admitting the existence of moral luck is giving up the idea of agency. We seem driven to the conclusion that no one is blameworthy for anything. But the alternative is to preserve our notions of agency and responsibility by concluding that moral value is subject to luck.
What is intrinsic luck?
Roughly, intrinsic luck is luck that arises from the elements of the project or action under consideration, while extrinsic luck is luck arising from “outside” the project. In the case of Gauguin, intrinsic luck is luck arising from Gauguin himself, since he is the only one involved in his project.
What is the heart of Williams' argument?
At the heart of Williams’ argument is the claim that a rational justification for a particular decision can only be given after the fact. This is what allows luck to enter into rational justification.
What is Williams' moral justification?
Williams hopes to inflict fatal damage on the notion of the moral by setting up a collision between rational and moral justification. Rational justification, Williams has suggested, is, at least partly, a matter of luck. Moral justification, as we have noted, is not supposed to be a matter of luck at all.
Early Critical Kant
First off let's call the position "early critical Kant" ( Groundwork , Critique of Pure Reason and Critique of pure Practical Reason) to describe the view where actions are moral when they result for a will acting from reason and no other motive (for more on this, a very good source is Marcia Baron's Kantian Ethics Almost without Apology ).
Moral Luck
Second, let's think about the contours of moral luck: It's the idea that whether or not we act morally is influenced by our background and resources. For instance, I'm posting on SE rather than slashing people's throats in part because of the upbringing I had.
Interface between Early Critical Kant and Moral Luck
Thus, just on this level, Kant's definition of morality and moral luck are at odds with each other. Is being at odds an objection? One type of objection is internal -- on a view's own criteria it fails due to incoherence, etc. Another type of objection is that a view doesn't match with reality.
Late Critical Kant
To make things a bit more complicated, Kant's own view may have resources to accommodate this. In what we can call "late critical Kant," in the Metaphysics of Morals (not the Groundwork) and Religion within the bounds of Reason Alone, Kant presents several things that complicate the early critical account.
Why is moral luck a problem?
The problem of moral luck arises because we seem to be committed to the general principle that we are morally assessable only to the extent that what we are assessed for depends on factors under our control (call this the “Control Principle”).
What is moral luck?
Moral luck occurs when an agent can be correctly treated as an object of moral judgment despite the fact that a significant aspect of what she is assessed for depends on factors beyond her control.
What is constitutive luck?
Constitutive luck is luck in who one is, or in the traits and dispositions that one has. Since our genes, care-givers, peers, and other environmental influences all contribute to making us who we are (and since we have no control over these) it seems that who we are is at least largely a matter of luck.
How to respond to moral luck?
There are three general approaches to responding to the problem of moral luck: (i) to deny that there is moral luck despite appearances, (ii) to accept the existence of moral luck while rejecting or restricting the Control Principle, or (iii) to argue that it is simply incoherent to accept or deny the existence of some type (s) of moral luck, so that with respect to at least the relevant types of moral luck, the problem of moral luck does not arise.
What are the four types of luck?
Nagel identifies four kinds of luck in all: resultant, circumstantial, constitutive, and causal . Resultant Luck. Resultant luck is luck in the way things turn out.
What is the second task of morality?
A second main task is to paint a plausible and coherent picture of morality that avoids luck. An important tool for those who wish to explain away the existence of moral luck is what Latus (2000) calls the “epistemic argument” (see Richards, Rescher, Rosebury, and Thomson).
What is the moral assessment of a family?
Most focus on two families of moral assessment: (i) the family that includes responsibility, blame, and praise for actions and/or for one’s own traits or dispositions, and (ii) the family that includes the notion of the moral worth of an agent and the moral quality of her character.
Generating The Problem of Moral Luck and Kinds of Luck
- The idea that morality is immune from luck finds inspiration inKant: Thomas Nagel approvingly cites this passage in the opening of his 1979article, “Moral Luck.” Nagel’s article began as areply to Williams’ paper of the same name, and the two articlestogether articulated in a new and powerful way a challenge for anyonewishing to defend the Kantian ...
Implications For Other Debates
- Before turning to proposed solutions to the problem, it will behelpful to see just what rests on resolving the problem of moralluck.
Kinds of Moral Assessment
- The Control Principle states that we are morally assessable only tothe extent that what we are morally assessed for is under our control.But it is important to recognize that there are many different kindsof moral assessment. For example, there are judgments about aperson’s character, for example, as “good” or“bad” (sometimes called “aretaic” judgments).There are also judgment…
Responding to The Problem: Three Approaches
- There are three general approaches to responding to the problem ofmoral luck: (i) to deny that there is moral luck despite appearances,(ii) to accept the existence of moral luck while rejecting orrestricting the Control Principle, or (iii) to argue that it is simplyincoherent to accept or deny the existence of some type(s) of moralluck, so that with respect to at least the relevant types of mor…
Conclusion
- The problem of moral luck is deeply unsettling. Naturally, there is awide variety of responses to it. On the one extreme are those who denythat there is any sort of moral luck, and on the other are those whoaccept every sort of moral luck. Most writers who have responded tothe problem fall somewhere in between; either they explicitly take amixed approach or they confine their argume…
Williams on Moral Luck
- a. The Argument
Williams’ aim in “Moral Luck” and much of his other work is to discredit the Kantianview of morality and to suggest that it would be best to abandon the notion of morality altogether (replacing it with the wider notion he calls the “ethical”). (See Williams, 1985, for the distinction.) … - b. Criticisms
Despite all the attention that Williams’ article has generated, his argument is actually fairly unimpressive. It is not clear, for instance, that moral value has to be the supreme sort of value. Why can’t it just be an important sort of value (and, according to what value are the various sort…
Nagel on Moral Luck
- a. Introduction to the Problem
Nagel identifies the problem of moral luck as arising from a conflict between our practice and an intuition most of us share about morality. He states the intuitionas follows: He then gives us a rough definition of the phenomenon of moral luck: Clearly cases of moral luck fly in the face of t… - b. Four Types of Luck
What are these facts? Nagel identifies four ways in which luck plays into our moral assessments: 1. Resultant Luck: “luck in the way one’s actions and projects turn out.” 2. Circumstantial Luck: the luck involved in “the kind of problems and situations one faces” 3. Causal Luck: “luck in how one …
Responses to The Problem
- Responses to the problem have been of two broad sorts: 1. The intuition is mistaken: there is nothing wrong with luck making a moral difference. 2. The so-called “fact” is not a fact at all: luck never does make a moral difference. The first sort of response has been the least popular. When it has been made, the approach has usually been to suggest that, if cases of moral luck are trou…
References and Further Reading
- The two main papers discussed in this article by Nagel and Williams, both entitled “Moral Luck,” were originally published in The Aristotelian Society Supplementary, Volume 1, 1976. Revised versions of both papers were published as chapters of Williams (1981) and Nagel (1979). The revised versions of these papers are also included in an excellent anthology edited by Daniel Sta…
Early Critical Kant
- First off let's call the position "early critical Kant" (Groundwork , Critique of Pure Reason and Critique of pure Practical Reason) to describe the view where actions are moral when they result for a will acting from reason and no other motive (for more on this, a very good source is Marcia Baron's Kantian Ethics Almost without Apology). Worded negatively, no action is a moral action i…
Moral Luck
- Second, let's think about the contours of moral luck: It's the idea that whether or not we act morally is influenced by our background and resources. For instance, I'm posting on SE rather than slashing people's throats in part because of the upbringing I had.
Interface Between Early Critical Kant and Moral Luck
- Thus, just on this level, Kant's definition of morality and moral luck are at oddswith each other. Is being at odds an objection? One type of objection is internal -- on a view's own criteria it fails due to incoherence, etc. Another type of objection is that a view doesn't match with reality. I'm not sure this is either of those, because this seems to be a disagreement about what morality is. Kant's cl…
Late Critical Kant
- To make things a bit more complicated, Kant's own view may have resources to accommodate this. In what we can call "late critical Kant," in the Metaphysics of Morals (not the Groundwork) and Religion within the bounds of Reason Alone, Kant presents several things that complicate the early critical account. In MM, Kant gives virtue an important role in developing character -- it's no…