Don't know, don't kill: Moral ignorance, culpability, and caution

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

108 Scopus citations

Abstract

This paper takes on several distinct but related tasks. First, I present and discuss what I will call the "Ignorance Thesis," which states that whenever an agent acts from ignorance, whether factual or moral, she is culpable for the act only if she is culpable for the ignorance from which she acts. Second, I offer a counterexample to the Ignorance Thesis, an example that applies most directly to the part I call the "Moral Ignorance Thesis." Third, I argue for a principle-Don't Know, Don't Kill-that supports the view that the purported counterexample actually is a counterexample. Finally, I suggest that my arguments in this direction can supply a novel sort of argument against many instances of killing and eating certain sorts of animals.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)59-97
Number of pages39
JournalPhilosophical Studies
Volume136
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2007
Externally publishedYes

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Philosophy

Keywords

  • Abortion
  • Blameless ignorance
  • Blameworthiness
  • Caution
  • Contextualism
  • Culpability
  • Moral ignorance
  • Recklessness
  • Responsibility
  • Vegetarianism

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Don't know, don't kill: Moral ignorance, culpability, and caution'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this