Responsibility in Cases of Structural and Personal Complicity: A Phenomenological Analysis

11Citations
Citations of this article
10Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

In cases of complicity in one’s own unfreedom and in structural injustice, it initially appears that agents are only vicariously responsible for their complicity because of the roles circumstantial and constitutive luck play in bringing about their complicity. By drawing on work from the phenomenological tradition, this paper rejects this conclusion and argues for a new responsive sense of agency and responsibility in cases of complicity. Highlighting the explanatory role of stubbornness in cases of complicity, it is argued that although agents may only be vicariously responsible for becoming complicit, they can be held more directly responsible for entrenching their complicity. The complicit agent is responsible for their complicity to the extent that they fail to take responsibility for it.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Knowles, C. (2021, April 1). Responsibility in Cases of Structural and Personal Complicity: A Phenomenological Analysis. Monist. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/monist/onaa034

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