Scholarlink

<p>Current conceptions of special responsibilities often adopt a narrow, individualistic lens that fails to consider the broader socio-relational context. In response to this gap, we propose a concept of relational responsibility that emphasises the interconnectedness of individuals and the wider societal context in which they exist. We posit that assigning relational responsibilities should not solely hinge on the voluntary nature of one’s relationships, but rather on the intrinsic value of these connections, as determined by individuals who hold pertinent roles within those relationships or who would be impacted by the definition of value. Our account acknowledges that many responsibilities, especially in caregiving contexts, are not chosen freely, and there should be normative limits to protect individuals from unreasonable burdens. Recognising the role of structural conditions in shaping responsibilities, we argue that collectives with the capacity and resources have an obligation to support individuals by mitigating these burdens and creating just conditions for care. This relational and structural reframing offers a more ethically attuned and practically responsive understanding of responsibility.</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

Relational Responsibility: Bringing the Wider Social Environment into the Analysis

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年6月23日

查看全文
  • Serene Ong,
  • Julian Savulescu

摘要

Current conceptions of special responsibilities often adopt a narrow, individualistic lens that fails to consider the broader socio-relational context. In response to this gap, we propose a concept of relational responsibility that emphasises the interconnectedness of individuals and the wider societal context in which they exist. We posit that assigning relational responsibilities should not solely hinge on the voluntary nature of one’s relationships, but rather on the intrinsic value of these connections, as determined by individuals who hold pertinent roles within those relationships or who would be impacted by the definition of value. Our account acknowledges that many responsibilities, especially in caregiving contexts, are not chosen freely, and there should be normative limits to protect individuals from unreasonable burdens. Recognising the role of structural conditions in shaping responsibilities, we argue that collectives with the capacity and resources have an obligation to support individuals by mitigating these burdens and creating just conditions for care. This relational and structural reframing offers a more ethically attuned and practically responsive understanding of responsibility.