When a person acts from ignorance, he is culpable for his action only if he is culpable for the ignorance from which he acts. The paper defends the view that this principle holds, not just for actions done from ordinary factual ignorance, but also for actions done from moral ignorance. The question is raised whether the principle extends to action done from ignorance about what one has most reason to do. It is tentatively proposed that the principle holds in full generality.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gideon Rosen (2002) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: