Responsibility voids

54Citations
Citations of this article
24Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Your institution provides access to this article.

Abstract

We present evidence for the existence of 'responsibility voids' in committee decision-making, that is, the existence of situations where no member of a committee can individually be held morally responsible for the outcome. We analyse three types of reasons (causal, normative and epistemic) for the emergence of responsibility voids, and show that each of them can occur in committees. But the conditions for these voids are so restrictive as to reduce the philosophical or institutional significance they might be thought to possess. © 2010 The Authors The Philosophical Quarterly © 2010 The Editors of The Philosophical Quarterly Published by Blackwell Publishing.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Braham, M., & Van Hees, M. (2011, January). Responsibility voids. Philosophical Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9213.2010.677.x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free