Abstract
Victor Tadros, in this chapter, draws attention to significant overlap in our practices of providing treatment to irresponsible wrongdoers, on the one hand, and our practices of holding the responsible to account, on the other. Alternately, how little space there is between treatment and holding accountable. This should be surprising. Much of Strawson’s argument presupposes that we have implicit familiarity with the difference, and with how significant it is. We become angry with the responsible; whereas we take a more detached perspective to children, the seriously impaired, or mentally ill, whom we regard as objects of treatment or management. These are supposed to represent two fundamentally distinct forms of engagement. If Tadros is right, this sense of a massive gulf in how it is appropriate to treat the responsible versus the exempt is an illusion. The actual difference is subtle.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Title of host publication | Lanson Lectures in Bioethics (2016-2022) |
Subtitle of host publication | Assisted Suicide, Responsibility, and Pandemic Ethics |
Editors | Hon-Lam LI |
Publisher | Springer Nature Switzerland AG |
Chapter | 11 |
Pages | 159-168 |
Number of pages | 10 |
ISBN (Electronic) | 9783031420528 |
ISBN (Print) | 9783031420511 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 16 Feb 2024 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2024.