A Critical Analysis Of Thomas Nagel's Theory Of Luck

Choices: we all make them daily. Every decision that we make and every action we take has a consequence. At times, our expected consequences and the actual outcome of our decision can differ, from minimal to the extreme. Thomas Nagel wrote on the moral aspects of assigning blame or praise on the actions or consequence of an agent, even if the agent was not in full control over the action or consequence. This theory is known as moral luck. Nagel attempts to assign luck into some objects in determining the outcomes of actions. I disagree with his interjection of luck into the discussion, as I do not believe in chance.
Nagel discusses the issue of luck in a moral assessment in the way things turn out. Negligence can range from slightly blameworthy

Taking into account the agent must have control over the factors that are morally relevant to their actions and can’t abandon the judgments we make in particular cases that do take factors outside an agents control into account. This idea still allows some factors to be subject to the forces of luck. This finding makes holding someone morally accountable for their actions unwarranted which is and unwanted outcome. Nagel believed the solution would be found by better understanding free will. There will always be variables in everyone’s situations. So when you make a decision you hope it turns out the way you expect it to. I believe people have a free will to do good or bad with the time they have on the earth, whether they want to make good moral decisions or bad immoral decisions. Being a good moral person does not always produce favorable circumstances. We all go through bad times that test our physical and mental being. The choices we make when responding to the test, making us stronger and wiser.
Nagel offered three examples for excusal from moral judgment. They are physical force, involuntary movement, and ignorance of the facts. He proposed through these concepts that a person be excused from moral judgment. If applied, these three instances would be out of an agent’s physical control making them not liable for any consequences. I agree that if someone is put in a place against their will by physical force, and