Privacy and the Standing to Hold Responsible

IF 1.1 2区 哲学 Q3 ETHICS
Linda Radzik
{"title":"Privacy and the Standing to Hold Responsible","authors":"Linda Radzik","doi":"10.1163/17455243-20234038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nIn order to be held responsible, it is not enough that you have done something blameworthy; someone else must also have the standing to hold you responsible. But a number of critics have claimed that this concept of ‘standing’ does not hold up to scrutiny and that we should excise it from our analyses of accountability practices. In this paper, I examine James Edwards’ (2019) attempt to define standing. I pose objections to some key features of Edwards’ account and defend an alternative. Reflecting on examples of meddling blame and privacy norms, I argue, helps us see that the concept of standing is useful after all.","PeriodicalId":51879,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Moral Philosophy","volume":"86 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Moral Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/17455243-20234038","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In order to be held responsible, it is not enough that you have done something blameworthy; someone else must also have the standing to hold you responsible. But a number of critics have claimed that this concept of ‘standing’ does not hold up to scrutiny and that we should excise it from our analyses of accountability practices. In this paper, I examine James Edwards’ (2019) attempt to define standing. I pose objections to some key features of Edwards’ account and defend an alternative. Reflecting on examples of meddling blame and privacy norms, I argue, helps us see that the concept of standing is useful after all.
隐私和责任立场
为了承担责任,仅仅做了应受谴责的事情是不够的;其他人也必须有资格追究你的责任。但一些批评人士声称,这种“地位”的概念经不起推敲,我们应该将其从对问责制实践的分析中删除。在这篇论文中,我考察了詹姆斯·爱德华兹(James Edwards,2019)试图定义站立。我对Edwards叙述的一些关键特征提出了反对意见,并为另一种说法辩护。我认为,反思干预指责和隐私规范的例子,有助于我们看到立场的概念毕竟是有用的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
52
期刊介绍: The Journal of Moral Philosophy is a peer-reviewed journal of moral, political and legal philosophy with an international focus. It publishes articles in all areas of normative philosophy, including pure and applied ethics, as well as moral, legal, and political theory. Articles exploring non-Western traditions are also welcome. The Journal seeks to promote lively discussions and debates for established academics and the wider community, by publishing articles that avoid unnecessary jargon without sacrificing academic rigour. It encourages contributions from newer members of the philosophical community. The Journal of Moral Philosophy is published four times a year, in January, April, July and October.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信