Talk:Moral luck
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details. | ||||||||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. | ||||||||
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale. | ||||||||
|
|||||||||
On the "Two Extremes" the second extreme states that "...there remains a single unappealing option: one is responsible for everything that one does, whether voluntarily or not, and for all the consequences, no matter how unforeseen or unlikely, that one's actions entail."
Well, to say that one is responsible for all the consequences, is to assume a consequentialist normative theory of ethics.(Something that Kant doesn't by the way) There are many other theories of ethics some that make denying moral luck much more attractive, as one wouldn't have to be responsible for the consequences of their actions.
Dark567 (talk) 00:50, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
