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...
| Publié dans: | Ethical theory and moral practice |
|---|---|
| Auteur principal: | |
| Collaborateurs: | |
| Type de support: | Électronique Article |
| Langue: | Anglais |
| Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | En cours de chargement...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publié: |
Springer Science + Business Media B. V
[2016]
|
| Dans: |
Ethical theory and moral practice
|
| RelBib Classification: | NBE Anthropologie NCA Éthique VA Philosophie |
| Sujets non-standardisés: | B
Free will skepticism
B Reactive attitudes B Personal caring |
| Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (Verlag) Volltext (doi) |
| Résumé: | 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 |
| Contient: | Enthalten in: Ethical theory and moral practice
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1007/s10677-016-9736-3 |