Analiza i Egzystencja

ISSN: 1734-9923     eISSN: 2300-7621    OAI    DOI: 10.18276/aie.2022.60-03
CC BY-SA   Open Access   DOAJ  ERIH PLUS  DOAJ

Issue archive / 60 (2022)
Cudzoziemiec jako uprzywilejowany podmiot moralny
(Foreigner as a priviledged moral agent)

Authors: Wojciech Lewandowski ORCID
Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II
Keywords: moral agent moral independence selflessness authenticity
Data publikacji całości:2022
Page range:21 (43-63)
Cited-by (Crossref) ?:

Abstract

In this paper I examine the moral experience of an agent who remains outside the network of close relationships. I analyze two rules of moral independence that might indicate that the agent is morally privileged in such situations. According to the first, an agent outside the relational network avoids the risks associated with identification with a social role. According to the second, the actions taken by the agent are characterized by a higher degree of selflessness and, therefore, have higher moral value. I argue that these rules can only have a prima facie nature and are constrained by many factors. I also show that the privileged position of the moral agent in the foreigner's situation is counterbalanced by difficulties in moral action in the areas of promises, blaming, shared responsibility and care giving.
Download file

Article file

Bibliography

1.Ahlin, J. (2018a). The impossibility of reliably determining the authenticity of desires: Implications for informed consent. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 21 (1), 43–50. DOI: 10.1007/s11019-017-9783-0.
2.Ahlin, J. (2018b). What justifies judgments of inauthenticity? HEC Forum, 30 (4), 361–377. DOI: 10.1007/s10730-018-9356-5.
3.Bauer, K. (2017). To be or not to be authentic. In defence of authenticity as an ethical ideal. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 20 (3), 567–580. DOI: 0.1007/s10677-017-9803-4.
4.Bialystok, L. (2014). Authenticity and the limits of philosophy. Dialogue, 53 (2), 271–298. DOI: 10.1017/S001221731300111X.
5.Bołtuć, P. (2013). Non-homogeneus moral space (from Bentham to Sen). Analiza i Egzystencja, 24, 43–59.
6.Brown, E. (2016). Blame: Strangers and the moral relationship. Analysis, 77 (1), 10–20. DOI: 10.1093/analys/anw058.
7.Cameron, C.D., Hutcherson, C.A., Ferguson, A.M., Scheffer, J.A., Hadjiandreou, E., Inzlicht, M. (2019). Empathy is hard work: People choose to avoid empathy because of its cognitive costs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148 (6), 962–976. DOI: 10.1037/xge0000595.
8.Cameron, C.D., Payne, B.K. (2011). Escaping affect: How motivated emotion regulation creates insensitivity to mass suffering. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100 (1), 1–15. DOI: 10.1037/a0021643.
9.Dancy, J. (2004). Ethics Without Principles. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
10.Dunn, T.L., Inzlicht, M., Risko, E.F. (2019). Anticipating cognitive effort: Roles of perceived error-likelihood and time demand s. Psychological Research, 83 (5), 1033–1056. DOI: 10.1007/s00426-017-0943-x.
11.Dworkin, G. (1988). The Theory and Practice of Autonomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12.Dworkin, R. (2013). Rights as trumps. W: A. Kavanagh, J. Oberdiek (red.), Arguing about Law (s. 335–344). Abingdon: Taylor and Francis Hoboken.
13.Feldman, S. (2015). Against Authenticity: Why you shouldn’t be yourself. Lanham: Lexington Books.
14.Frankfurt, H.G. (1971). Freedom of the will and the concept of a person. The Journal of Philosophy, 68 (1), 5–20. DOI: 10.2307/2024717.
15.Frankfurt, H.G. (1984). Necessity and desire. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 45 (1), 1–13.
16.Hannah, S.T., Thompson, R.L., Herbst, K.C. (2020). Moral identity complexity: Situated morality within and across work and social roles. Journal of Management, 46 (5), 726–757. DOI: 10.1177/0149206318814166.
17.Hu, T., Zheng, X., Huang, M. (2020). Absence and presence of human interaction: The relationship between loneliness and empathy. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 768. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00768.
18.Isaacs, T.L. (2011). Moral Responsibility in Collective Contexts. Oxford: Oxford.
19.Jaeggi, R. (2014). Alienation. New York: Columbia University Press.
20.Kaczmarek, E. (2015). Autentyczność emocji w bioetycznym sporze o ulepszanie człowieka. Czy „pigułka szczęścia” może dać prawdziwe szczęście? Etyka, 51, 9–23. DOI: 10.14394/etyka.522.
21.Kolodny, N., Wallace, R.J. (2003). Promises and practices revisited. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 31 (2), 119–154.
22.Kraemer, F. (2009). Picturing the authenticity of emotions. W: M. Salmela, V. Mayer (red.), Emotions, Ethics, and Authenticity (s. 71–90). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
23.Lippert-Rasmussen, K. (2003). Identification and responsibility. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 6 (4), 349–376. DOI: 10.1023/B:ETTA.0000004623.85980.57.
24.MacIntyre, A. (1999). Social structures and their threats to moral agency. Philosophy, 74 (3), 311–329. DOI: 10.1017/S0031819199000431.
25.Parens, E. (2005). Authenticity and ambivalence: Toward understanding the enhancement debate. Hastings Center Report, 35 (3), 34–41.
26.Penner, J. (2014). Promises, agreements, and contracts. W: G. Klass, G. Letsas, P. Saprai (red.), Philosophical Foundations of Contract Law (s. 116–134). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198713012.003.0007.
27.Railton, P. (1984). Alienation, consequentialism, and the demands of morality. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 134–171.
28.Scanlon, T. (2008). Moral Dimensions: Permissibility, meaning, blame. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
29.Seidman, J. (2010). Caring and incapacity. Philosophical Studies, 147 (2), 301–322. DOI: 10.1007/s11098-009-9428-0.
30.Sher, G. (2013). Wrongdoing and relationships: The problem of the stranger. W: D.J. Coates, N.A. Tognazzini (red.), Blame: Its nature and norms (s. 49–65). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
31.Shiffrin, S. (2008). Promising, conventionalism, and intimate relationships. Philosophical Review, 117 (4), 481–524.
32.Sorensen, K. (2010). Effort and Moral Worth. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 13 (1), 89–109. DOI: 10.1007/s10677-009-9159-5.
33.Stocker, M. (1976). The schizophrenia of modern ethical theories. The Journal of Philosophy, 73 (14), 453–466.
34.Taylor, C. (2002). Etyka autentyczności. Tłum. A. Pawelec. Kraków: Znak.
35.Walker, M.U. (1991). Partial consideration. Ethics, 101 (4), 758–774.
36.Wallace, R.J. (1994). Responsibility and the Moral Sentiments. Cambridge: Harvard
37.Watson, G. (2004). Agency and Answerability: Selected essays. Oxford: Oxford
38.Wiśniewski, R. (2011). Interesy i wartości, użyteczność i godność – o potrzebie interwencji w moralne gry językowe. Filozofia Chrześcijańska, 8, 7. DOI: 10.14746/fc.2011.08.14.
39.Wolf, S.R. (1990). Freedom Within Reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press.