In this paper, I assess critically the recent debate on corrective duties across moral and legal philosophy. Two prominent positions have emerged: the Kantian rights‐based view (holding that what triggers corrections is a failure to respect others' right to freedom) and the so‐called continuity view (correcting means attempting to do what one was supposed to do before). Neither position, I try to show, offers a satisfactory explanation of the ground (why correct?) and content (how to correct?) of corrective duties. In the final section, I suggest that it is probably better to restrict the label “corrective duties” to duties generated by interpersonal wronging.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Giulio Fornaroli (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: