A Defense of Derk Pereboom's Containment Policy
Derk Pereboom disagrees with P.F. Strawson that abandoning the reactive attitudes associated with praise and blame would come at the price of exiting our personal relationships. According to Pereboom, we can contain or modify our attitudes in ways that preserve, and perhaps even enrich interpersonal...
| Veröffentlicht in: | Ethical theory and moral practice |
|---|---|
| 1. VerfasserIn: | |
| Beteiligte: | |
| Medienart: | Elektronisch Aufsatz |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| Verfügbarkeit prüfen: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Lade...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Springer Science + Business Media B. V
[2016]
|
| In: |
Ethical theory and moral practice
|
| RelBib Classification: | NBE Anthropologie NCA Ethik VA Philosophie |
| weitere Schlagwörter: | B
Free will skepticism
B Reactive attitudes B Personal caring |
| Online Zugang: |
Volltext (Verlag) Volltext (doi) |
| Zusammenfassung: | Derk Pereboom disagrees with P.F. Strawson that abandoning the reactive attitudes associated with praise and blame would come at the price of exiting our personal relationships. According to Pereboom, we can contain or modify our attitudes in ways that preserve, and perhaps even enrich interpersonal relationships. In a recent article, Seth Shabo defends the inseparability thesis in order to undermine Perebooms containment policy. Drawing on David Goldmans work on non-antagonistic responses to wrongdoing, we defend Pereboom from Shabos critique. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1572-8447 |
| Enthält: | Enthalten in: Ethical theory and moral practice
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1007/s10677-016-9736-3 |