Internalism and Externalism

Abstract

Two general kinds of view about moral responsibility are discussed—internalism and externalism. An agent’s internal condition at a time may be defined as something specified by the collection of all psychological truths about the agent at the time that are silent on how he came to be as he is at that time. Internalists maintain that—at least in the case of direct moral responsibility—all that is needed to determine whether an agent is morally responsible for a pertinent action is to be found in his internal condition. Externalists disagree; they contend that agents’ personal histories can have a special bearing on moral responsibility. This disagreement is described and discussed. Various thought experiments are used to shed light on the disagreement and to start building a case for an externalist view.