Responsibility in Cases of Structural and Personal Complicity

A Phenomenological Analysis

Bibliographic Data

ID23193643
AuthorsCharlotte Knowles (0000-0001-9172-4781, University of Groningen, corresponding author)
Year2021
Volume104
Issue2
Pages224-237
Publication date2021-03-14
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueThe Monist (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0026-9662 • E-ISSN: 2153-3601
PublisherOxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1093/monist/onaa034
OpenAlexW3137542698
LanguageEN
Citations received8
References cited13

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.

Agency (philosophy) · Circumstantial evidence · Complicity · Epistemology · Political science · Sociology · Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies · Law · Philosophical Ethics and Theory · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access