RESPONSIBILITY WITHOUT VOLITIONAL CONTROL

Abstract

When are moral agents open to appropriate responses on the basis of what they do or how they are? That is, when are they morally responsible? Some--the volitionists--believe that it is only when agents possess volitional control in some relevant way. Others--the attributionists--disagree, for they believe that when an agent?s actions or states are indicative of the agent?s moral self, responsibility obtains even without volitional control. My project is threefold. First, I argue for attributionism over volitionism. Next, I show that Pamela Hieronymi's (2008) attributionist view is satisfactory, given three concerns in my paper. Finally, I briefly consider the prospect of extending Hieronymi's view to responsibility for emotions and desires, concluding that it seems as yet feasible.