Transcript 100Nagel
Thomas Nagel
JUST LUCKY TO BE GOOD?
OR:
JUST UNLUCKY TO BE BAD?
Thomas Nagel (born 1937)
[NAGEL’s central idea]
J.-P. Sartre:
SUBJECTIVE versus OBJECTIVE
Subjective: inner, self, conscious, free,
responsible, moral-or-immoral
Objective: outer, thing, mechanical,
determined, irresponsible, amoral
The TENSION
Moral Luck is impossible
versus
Moral Luck is real
1) The “condition of control” (493):
“people cannot be morally assessed for
what is…due to factors beyond their
control”
2) “If the condition of control is consistently
applied, it threatens to erode most of the
moral assessments we…make.” (493)
INTENTION versus RESULTS
“There is a morally significant
difference between rescuing someone
from a burning building and dropping
him from a twelfth-story window while
trying to rescue him.”
[Is this true? Why?]
Four grades of moral luck (495-499)
iv) results (495-7) e.g.: drinking &
driving, revolutionaries, baby care
iii) circumstances (497-8) e.g.: in Nazi
Germany
ii) antecedent circumstances (498-9):
“Baby Doc”, drug experimentation
i) constitutive (?): temperament,
[forebrain structures]
CONCLUSION 1
The threat is realized:
“If the condition of control is consistently
applied, it threatens to erode most of the
moral assessments we…make.” (493)
The “condition of control” (493): “people
cannot be morally assessed for what
is…due to factors beyond their control”
BUT: If we subtract moral luck (by applying
condition of control),
“…nothing remains.” (498)
CONCLUSION 2
“…actions are events
and people [are] things.” (499)
[NOTES:
1. This is the result of taking the
objective view of the world.
2. We cannot really accept this given
our subjective view of the world.]
NAGEL’S DISCUSSION (499)
1. “We are unable to view ourselves
simply as portions of the world…”
2. “Guilt and indignation, shame and
contempt, pride and admiration are
internal and external sides of the
same moral attitudes.”
3. We cannot accept moral luck “for it
leaves us with no one to be.”