Friday, September 13, 2013
Doctrine of Coercion and PAP
PAP is the principle that you are only morally responsible for your actions if there was an alternate possibility for your actions. In other words, moral responsibility requires that you could have acted differently than you did act. Frankfurt thinks that PAP gets some credibility from its association with the Doctrine of Coercion (DoC). DoC is the principle that if you are coerced into doing something, then you are not morally responsible for that action. In other words, coercion and moral responsibility are mutually exclusive. Coercion means being forced to do something, either by physical force, threats or intimidation. Frankfurt thinks that DoC is true. He also thinks that many people believe PAP in part because they think that DoC is just a more particularized version of PAP. In other words, Frankfurt thinks that being coerced is just one way of being unable to act otherwise.
Frankfurt clarifies that the reason why we excuse someone when they were coerced is because the coercion is the reason why they acted as they did. But DoC can be true even if PAP is false. Frankfurt provides thought experiments meant to show that there are instances when a person lacks any alternative possibilities for action and yet that person is still morally responsible. A person is excused from moral responsibility only if the coercion or the inability to do otherwise are the only reason why a person acted as they did.
Frankfurt then offers up a revised version of PAP, according to which you are morally responsible for you actions if you acted that way only because you could not do otherwise.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment