Dana Nelkin (University of California and San Diego): 'Desert and Degrees of Liability'
Abstract: In this paper, I examine the relationship between how blameworthy one is, how liable on is to harm, and how, all things considered, we ought to distribute harm in cases in which harm must come to some. I first consider two influential families of views: according to the first, blameworthiness, and the desert of consequences that results, play no role in liability, despite initial appearances. According to the second, or what I call the “culpability as constraint” view, desert plays an important role in determining liability to harm, but no further role in determining how, all things considered, we ought to distribute harm. I argue against both of these views, posing a novel puzzle for the “culpability as constraint” view. I then put forward and elaborate two versions of a solution that recognizes two distinct roles for culpability in the moral calculus of the distribution of harms.
