When can someone be blamed for being sexist? Can you be responsible for being sexist if you were raised in a sexist family and have never had a chance to become aware of a different world view? Could you be blamed as an individual? Does it even make sense to think of "responsibilities" and "blame" together?
(OFC I oversimplify here)
@marylindelgado @hphilosopher @philosophy @Nazishmunch @jonasblatter @nowan @contessa
Sorry that it took me so long. I had to think about what you said and also had a big workload at the university and in other projects.
1/
First a small summary:
We discussed the case of whether some people who do the same but have different starting points could be blamed in the same way. A had progressive parents who taught them that all genders are equal while B had parents who taught them the opposite. Both joined a party with the goal to restore the “natural order” in which cis-men should dominate all other genders.
2/
I agree that there are many other factors. Both have the chance to learn and that they should do this is clear. Also it seems clear to me that nobody should have to deny their rights because others did not have the chance to properly learn how to treat others well.. What A and B do is clearly harmful and both should be blamed.
3/
What makes me think more about this case is what @marylindelgado has written here:
"A sensible decision depends namely on our ability to epistemically contrast our beliefs. "
Because I think this is the relevant difference between A and B. I would say that A had much better training in doing that. (I call these ethical competences in my PhD thesis.) While B has had almost no training in it. Maybe we could also say that their ethical literacy is different?
4/
What follows from this? I think it is odd to say that nothing follows. That we should just say that both did the same because it had the same consequences and harms non cis men in the same way. This seems too simple for me. I want to hold A much more responsible for what they did. A should have known better. A had every chance in their previous life to develop these ethical competences.
5/
While B is more or less an ethical illiterate. A put away what they were given on purpose. B just follows the path they were put on by their parents.
6/
I don’t think that just by looking at the consequences we could give a good answer here. Also I don’t think we will find a proper solution to stop A and B from harming others if we ignore their background.
7/
However I also see the problem that if we non cis men are attacked by them why should we have some sort of pity with B. They threaten us. The first thing we need to is protect ourselves and see to it that they don’t get any influence in society.
8/
But maybe we could stop them differently. We could confront A with knowledge which they already have. We could confront B with counter evidence, demonstrating to them that cis women can achieve the same as cis men if they aren't oppressed by people like B….
9/
I’m not sure about all this. I struggle with this question as a philosopher and as a queer activist.
Thank you for your thoughts and sorry again that it took me so long to respond to them. I hope I did not miss any important points from you.
10/10
@feministepistemology I'd understood @marylindelgado to be pointing out that we're rarely (if ever) in a position to accurately judge someone's epistemic opportunities. Based on my own experience of failing to appreciate things that (in retrospect) I should have seen and understood I'd add: even our own. So while I'm perfectly willing to say that when talking to a person like B we should be understanding, I don't think that understanding should have any bearing on our ethical judgement.
1/
@feministepistemology Obviously you're free to argue that there's an absolute sense in which A may be more culpable even if we can only guess at that truth -- I'm personally inclined against that view because I think ethics should be (and inevitably is, in fact, if I'm laying my priors on the table) practical and socially engaged, but there are certainly views on ethics that don't have such a commitment.
2/2
"I'm personally inclined against that view because I think ethics should be (and inevitably is, in fact, if I'm laying my priors on the table) practical and socially engaged, but there are certainly views on ethics that don't have such a commitment."
Could you elobarate this a little bit further?
Thanks.
In Switzerland there is something which is called: ""mitigating circumstances". (Milderende Umstände)
So if somebody provoke you, you get in anger and lose controll and then hurt them you get not the same as if you do it in cold blood.
Do you not have something like this in your law system?
@feministepistemology
Read this paper from Angela Smith in my seminar on moral responsibility this week and rediscovered her valuable insight on the topic:
https://philpapers.org/rec/SMIRFA
I agree with her that we are responsible (answerable) for any attitude, but blame requires more knowledge about the circumstances of how we came to it.
Would you not make a difference between this two cases?
A was raised in a very progressive family. The parents of A taught them that women/men and further genders are equal.
B was raised by christian fundamentalists and learned how their father enforced his power over their mother and that in general cis man are superior to everyone else.
1/
Now A and B both join a party with the goal to put non cis-men in their "natural place".
Personally, I would blame A much more. than B for joining this party.
2/2
Would you say that both had the same chance to become a decent human beeing?
@Nazishmunch @feministepistemology @hphilosopher @philosophy Absolutely - I think that may be part of the point Angela Smith makes in the paper @jonasblatter mentioned. We can be responsible (and justifiably held to account) for things that are beyond our control.
I'm not even sure the troubled version of B I described above isn't blameworthy, rather than just responsible for his views. In the end he refuses to change his views despite seeing evidence that his views cause harm.
@feministepistemology
@hphilosopher @philosophy
I think the blame comes at the point they are given that choice. Once someone points out to B that their actions are immoral in a way they understand I would begin to blame them for continuing.
That also kinda implies we all have a moral obligation to introspect and be open to changing our behavior based on feedback.
@contessa @hphilosopher @philosophy
Thank you for all your responses. I'm working on an answer but I would not be able to give it until tomorrow or on monday.
Why do you need little stories?
The - age old - questions:
Is doing Good to do as you where taught? Or Follow social norms or religious dictate...
Conversely is Bad: acting in contradiction? Or flip-flopping to other norms or dictates or world views?
To do good/bad should one have intent? Choice?
If not, what's particular about sexism?
Sexism is just something which interests me more than other cases.
"Sexism is just something which interests me more than other cases."
Is that something that makes such judgements different to other moral judgements?
Jonas Wittwer
Nazish
Jeremy
Marylin Delgado
Hermit Philosopher
Jonas Blatter
Contessa
PeterD 🇩🇪 🇨🇦
Mizmar