Denial of Responsibility and Normative Negation
نویسنده
چکیده
In this paper I provide some linguistic evidence to the thesis that responsibility judgments are normative. I present an argument from negation, since the negation of descriptive judgments is structurally different from the negation of normative judgments. In particular, the negation of responsibility judgments seem to conform to the pattern of the negation of normative judgments, thus being a prima facie evidence for the normativity of responsibility judgments. I assume — for the argument’s sake — Austin’s distinction between justification and excuse, and I sketch how to accommodate the distinction between internal (justification) and external (excuse) negation of responsibility within a language with a second-order analogous of existential generalization and λ operator. In the end I confront with and refute some objections against this argument.
منابع مشابه
Ethical copula, negation, and responsibility judgments - Prior's contribution to the philosophy of normative language
Prior’s arguments for and against seeing ‘ought’ as a copula and his considerations about normative negation are applied to the case of responsibility judgments. My thesis will be that responsibility judgments, even though often expressed by using the verb ‘to be’, are in fact normative judgments. This is shown by analyzing their negation, which parallels the behavior of ought negation.
متن کاملDual - processes in conditional inference behaviour 1
134 words) We examined a large set of conditional inference data compiled from several previous studies and asked three questions: how is normative performance related to intelligence, does negative conclusion bias stem from Type 1 or Type 2 processing, and does implicit negation bias stem from Type 1 or Type 2 processing? Our analysis demonstrated that a) rejecting denial of the antecedent and...
متن کاملThe Errors of Individualistic Public Health Interventions: Denial of Treatment to Obese Persons; Comment on “Denial of Treatment to Obese Patients—the Wrong Policy on Personal Responsibility for Health”
I agree entirely with Nir Eyal’s perspective that denying treatment to obese patients is morally wrong. However, the reasons for this belief differ in some ways from Eyal’s analysis. In this commentary, I will try to explain the similarities and differences in our perspectives. My primary claim is that the denial of treatment to obese patients is wrong principally because (i) it eschews a whole...
متن کاملA Doctor’s First, and Last, Responsibility is to Care Comment on “Denial of Treatment to Obese Patients—the Wrong Policy on Personal Responsibility for Health”
The obesity epidemic raises important and complex issues for clinicians and policy-makers, such as what clinical and public health measures will be most effective and most ethically-sound. While Nir Eyal’s analysis of these issues is very helpful and while he correctly concludes that “conditioning the very aid that patients need in order to become healthier on success in becoming healthier” is ...
متن کاملDenial of Treatment to Obese Patients—the Wrong Policy on Personal Responsibility for Health
In many countries around the world, including Iran, obesity is reaching epidemic proportions. Doctors have recently taken, or expressed support for, an extreme ‘personal responsibility for health’ policy against obesity: refusing services to obese patients. This policy may initially seem to improve patients’ incentives to fight obesity. But turning access to medical services into a benefit depe...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
دوره شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2014