Conclusion
I conclude that the explanatory view of consequences is a fruitful one.
This view accounts for our common sense view that actions are, in some sense, ‘sufficient’ for their consequences. It shows in a concrete and illuminating manner that we are or may be responsible for a vast number of events no matter how ‘innocently’ our actions may be described. It allows for the fact that individuals lack responsibility for consequences of collective actions, thereby explaining a generally felt ‘double effect’ built into our social morality. It brings into light and explains the fact that some degree of determinism seems to be presupposed if people are ever morally responsible for any events whatsoever. Finally, the explanatory view of consequences yields precise and attractive interpretations of the open and the closed views of responsibility.
Similar content being viewed by others
Bibliography
Bergström, L.: The Alternatives and Consequences of Actions (Stockholm, 1966).
Hempel, C. G. and Oppenheim, P.: ‘Studies in the logic of explanation’, Philosophy of Science XV (1948).
Mackie, J. L.: The Cement of the Universe (Oxford, 1974).
Slote, M. A.: ‘Time in counterfactuals’, Philosophical Review LXXXVII (1978), pp. 2–27.
Tännsjö, T.: ‘The morality of abstract entities’, Theoria LXIV (1978), pp. 1–18.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tännsjö, T. Responsibility and the explanatory view of consequences. Philos Stud 42, 151–161 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00374030
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00374030