Moral Responsibility by Christopher Cowley, 2014 London, Routledge256 pp., £52/$90 (hb); £16/$29.95 (pb)Consciousness and Moral Responsibility by Neil Levy, 2014 Oxford, Oxford University Press176 pp., £27.50 (hb)

2015 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 330-333
Author(s):  
Grant Gillett
Mind ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 124 (496) ◽  
pp. 1328-1332
Author(s):  
George Sher

KÜLÖNBSÉG ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Virág Véber

Recenzió Michael Brownstein – Jennifer Saul (szerk.): Implicit Bias and Philosophy című kétkötetes antológiájáról. Brownstein, Michael – Saul, Jennifer (szerk.): Implicit Bias and Philosophy. 1. köt. Metaphysics and Epistemology. 2. köt. Moral Responsibility, Structural Injustice, and Ethics. New York, Oxford University Press, 2016.


2021 ◽  
pp. 189-206
Author(s):  
Oisín Deery

This concluding chapter summarizes the central claims of the book. Additionally, it argues that the HPC natural-kind view about free actions has the resources to address various empirical threats to free will. For example, Neil Levy has argued that recent findings about how implicit biases affect actions threatens free will and moral responsibility. However, the natural-kind view defuses this threat, including Levy’s version of it. The chapter also shows how the natural-kind view can shed light on emerging questions about whether artificially intelligent agents might ever act freely or be responsible for their actions, and if so in what sense. Finally, the chapter sketches some findings indicating that folk thinking may actually assume something like the natural-kind view.


2002 ◽  
Vol 96 (1) ◽  
pp. 189-189
Author(s):  
Joan C. Tronto

Jamie Mayerfeld has written a wise and morally sensitive book that he hopes will compel readers to take seriously their “prima facie duty to relieve suffering” (p. 9). Insofar as “attention to suffering has been a casualty of a long series of attacks on hedonistic utilitarianism” (p. 3), Mayerfeld offers a thorough account of the nature of suffering and argues for the view that its badness imposes a universal prima facie duty for people to try to avoid suffering. Since the purpose of moral inquiry is “to identify wrong kinds of behavior so that we can avoid them” (p. 7), Mayerfeld, not himself a utilitarian, follows a catholic approach and skillfully draws upon arguments from utilitarians, deontologists, Aristotelians, hedonists, psychologists, and philosophers to support his moral intuitions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document