Scholarlink

<p>There has been extensive debate concerning past wrongdoers whose culpability is potentially mitigated by being raised in ethically flawed societies: Rosen’s “Hittite lord”, Fricker’s “traditional schoolmaster” and Wolf’s “male chauvinists”, for example. I argue that the most morally and philosophically significant such cases have been overlooked or misunderstood. To show this, I introduce “flawed heroes”: the example I use is Abraham Lincoln on slavery and race. Raised in societies with ethical views far from our own, such figures are now regarded as heroes because of their moral leadership; they are now regarded as flawed because their views remained deeply misguided. I begin by sketching the existing debate and introducing the contrasting category of a man or woman ‘of their time’ (§1). I next define and motivate the “flawed hero” case, and I outline Lincoln’s position (§2). I then examine whether, how and why any blame attached to him might be mitigated on a quality of will model (§3) and on a control model (§4). These results demonstrate the complex relations between historical culpability and differing theories of responsibility, and they give a sharper understanding of this crucial set of cases.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Flawed Heroes and Historical Moral Culpability

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年7月15日

查看全文
  • Sacha Golob

摘要

There has been extensive debate concerning past wrongdoers whose culpability is potentially mitigated by being raised in ethically flawed societies: Rosen’s “Hittite lord”, Fricker’s “traditional schoolmaster” and Wolf’s “male chauvinists”, for example. I argue that the most morally and philosophically significant such cases have been overlooked or misunderstood. To show this, I introduce “flawed heroes”: the example I use is Abraham Lincoln on slavery and race. Raised in societies with ethical views far from our own, such figures are now regarded as heroes because of their moral leadership; they are now regarded as flawed because their views remained deeply misguided. I begin by sketching the existing debate and introducing the contrasting category of a man or woman ‘of their time’ (§1). I next define and motivate the “flawed hero” case, and I outline Lincoln’s position (§2). I then examine whether, how and why any blame attached to him might be mitigated on a quality of will model (§3) and on a control model (§4). These results demonstrate the complex relations between historical culpability and differing theories of responsibility, and they give a sharper understanding of this crucial set of cases.