Investigates the modal solution's effectiveness in addressing moral luck, suggesting implications for philosophical discussions.
In this paper, I investigate the so-called modal solution to the problem of moral luck. I spend some time positioning the solution within the philosophical debate on moral luck. I follow Hartman [2017] in considering it a special case of the counterfactual view of the problem of moral luck. The modal solution was developed in order to block one of the main objections to the standard counterfactual position developed by Zimmerman. I defend the solution against four objections, which, I argue, are limited insofar as they involve a misapplication of the solution to cases it was not meant to cover. This should not be considered an argument for the modal solution, however, as I go on to present my own counterexample. This counterexample involves a proper application of the solution to the relevant case, which nevertheless leads to problems.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Miloš Kosterec (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: