The puzzle(S) of frankfurt-style omission cases

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Can we be morally responsible for omitting to do things that we were not able to do? Although at first sight it appears that we cannot, some have argued that Frankfurt-style omission cases show otherwise. This generates a puzzle that resists an easy solution. This chapter argues that solving this puzzle is like opening a can of worms, in that identifying the right solution to it generates other even more intricate and more interesting puzzles. The chapter then offers some tentative solutions to the puzzles, old and new, but its main goal is to draw attention to the problems, and to uncover the kinds of elements that we would need to solve them.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationThe Ethics and Law of Omissions
PublisherOxford University Press
Pages133-147
Number of pages15
ISBN (Electronic)9780190683450
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2017

Fingerprint

Omission

Keywords

  • Alternative possibility
  • Frankfurt-style case
  • Moral responsibility
  • Omission
  • Thirsty traveler

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Arts and Humanities(all)

Cite this

Sartorio, C. (2017). The puzzle(S) of frankfurt-style omission cases. In The Ethics and Law of Omissions (pp. 133-147). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190683450.003.0007

The puzzle(S) of frankfurt-style omission cases. / Sartorio, Carolina.

The Ethics and Law of Omissions. Oxford University Press, 2017. p. 133-147.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Sartorio, C 2017, The puzzle(S) of frankfurt-style omission cases. in The Ethics and Law of Omissions. Oxford University Press, pp. 133-147. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190683450.003.0007
Sartorio C. The puzzle(S) of frankfurt-style omission cases. In The Ethics and Law of Omissions. Oxford University Press. 2017. p. 133-147 https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190683450.003.0007
Sartorio, Carolina. / The puzzle(S) of frankfurt-style omission cases. The Ethics and Law of Omissions. Oxford University Press, 2017. pp. 133-147
@inbook{0665a580536b45f2a61409f8d4c46937,
title = "The puzzle(S) of frankfurt-style omission cases",
abstract = "Can we be morally responsible for omitting to do things that we were not able to do? Although at first sight it appears that we cannot, some have argued that Frankfurt-style omission cases show otherwise. This generates a puzzle that resists an easy solution. This chapter argues that solving this puzzle is like opening a can of worms, in that identifying the right solution to it generates other even more intricate and more interesting puzzles. The chapter then offers some tentative solutions to the puzzles, old and new, but its main goal is to draw attention to the problems, and to uncover the kinds of elements that we would need to solve them.",
keywords = "Alternative possibility, Frankfurt-style case, Moral responsibility, Omission, Thirsty traveler",
author = "Carolina Sartorio",
year = "2017",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1093/oso/9780190683450.003.0007",
language = "English (US)",
pages = "133--147",
booktitle = "The Ethics and Law of Omissions",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - The puzzle(S) of frankfurt-style omission cases

AU - Sartorio, Carolina

PY - 2017/1/1

Y1 - 2017/1/1

N2 - Can we be morally responsible for omitting to do things that we were not able to do? Although at first sight it appears that we cannot, some have argued that Frankfurt-style omission cases show otherwise. This generates a puzzle that resists an easy solution. This chapter argues that solving this puzzle is like opening a can of worms, in that identifying the right solution to it generates other even more intricate and more interesting puzzles. The chapter then offers some tentative solutions to the puzzles, old and new, but its main goal is to draw attention to the problems, and to uncover the kinds of elements that we would need to solve them.

AB - Can we be morally responsible for omitting to do things that we were not able to do? Although at first sight it appears that we cannot, some have argued that Frankfurt-style omission cases show otherwise. This generates a puzzle that resists an easy solution. This chapter argues that solving this puzzle is like opening a can of worms, in that identifying the right solution to it generates other even more intricate and more interesting puzzles. The chapter then offers some tentative solutions to the puzzles, old and new, but its main goal is to draw attention to the problems, and to uncover the kinds of elements that we would need to solve them.

KW - Alternative possibility

KW - Frankfurt-style case

KW - Moral responsibility

KW - Omission

KW - Thirsty traveler

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85042597927&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85042597927&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/oso/9780190683450.003.0007

DO - 10.1093/oso/9780190683450.003.0007

M3 - Chapter

AN - SCOPUS:85042597927

SP - 133

EP - 147

BT - The Ethics and Law of Omissions

PB - Oxford University Press

ER -