Moral Luck In Thomas Nagel's View Of Moral Luck

Good Essays
In the article Moral Luck, Thomas Nagel is defending his definition of moral luck and opposing Kant’s view of moral luck. Kant believes that moral luck is the good will and to do our duty by the reasons for our actions. Nagel believes that this theory is too simple. Nagel’s view of moral luck is when outside factors that are out of our control are considered to be reasons for moral judgements whether the actions are good or bad. Good and bad luck should not influence our moral judgement of a person and their actions. There is a problem with Kant’s condition of moral luck which is the conditions of moral judgement. Nagel intuitively believes that people should not be held accountable for their actions morally, if it is not their fault.…show more content…
This luck more looks at your traits and why you did the action you did. An example that Nagel gives us is a truck driver who runs over a child. The truck driver is not at fault for this action, but comes away from the accident feeling terrible. In this case it is not moral luck. What if the truck driver was negligent about checking his brakes and the child dies? This case would be moral luck because he comes out blaming part of the reason on himself. Nagel argues that this second scenario would not necessarily be his fault because how would he know that a child would run in front of his…show more content…
Nagel believes that the difficult choices we me make and the outcome of those decisions cannot be foreseen. An assessment of the choice is possible to make in advance; however, another assessment of choice we must await for the outcome, because the outcome determines what has been done. I believe that Nagel is correct about the assessment of choices with the outcome because you could make a choice before the action happens than there is an unexpected action that happens which you must choose another choice which dictates the outcome of your choice. In Moral Luck, Nagel believes that certain actions are unjustifiably bad within themselves or risky that the outcomes of the action does not make it right. When outcome does play a role in moral judgement than it can be objective and timeless. Kant was insistent on the irrelevance of personality traits within the control of will. If Kant believes that than it would rule out moral judgements of virtues and vices. I disagree with Kant, I believe that when it comes to a good will the outcome and the action is affected by your personality and traits in which could make the will
Get Access