Article contents
Desert and Dissociation
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 08 March 2023
Abstract
I argue against the idea of basic desert. I claim that the supposed normative force of desert considerations is better understood in terms of dissociation. The starting point is to note that an important strategy in spelling out the apparent normative force of desert considerations appeals to the idea of complicity. I argue that the idea of basic desert cannot give a good explanation of this connection. I propose that it is rather dissociation that is explanatorily basic. I further argue that dissociation is an expressive action. Dissociation from wrongdoing—expressed as distancing from the wrongdoer—is an expressive attempt to do justice to the significance of wrongdoing in a way analogous to the expressive attempt to thank someone adequately for doing you a favor. I draw on the idea of dissociation as an expressive action to explain why it should be that a failure to dissociate is a source of complicity.
- Type
- Article
- Information
- Journal of the American Philosophical Association , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , March 2024 , pp. 116 - 134
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the American Philosophical Association
Footnotes
This paper was presented at the Moral Conversations workshop at the University of Oslo; the Desert conference at the Centre for Moral and Political Philosophy at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem; the Emotions in Legal Theory workshop at the University of Surrey; as well as to audiences at the Universities of Reading and Bristol. I am very grateful to the organizers of these events and for the helpful comments I received from participants. Thanks also to the editors and referees of this journal. I would like to record a special debt of gratitude to Andreas Brekke Carlsson for a conversation that led me to write this paper.
References
- 1
- Cited by