ABSTRACT
A popular view holds that an agent’s moral responsibility for an outcome is proportional to the causal contribution of their actions to that outcome, all else being equal. This paper challenges this view. I argue that there are counterexamples because some causal difference-makers (that is, factors that can influence the degree of causal contribution) are morally irrelevant. I further contend that the proportionality relation is not as explanatorily indispensable as its proponents claim. This is because differences in moral responsibility can be explained by other theories, such as the quality of will account, without referencing causal contribution.
€
Jiahe Zed Zhang, With Greater Causal Power Comes Greater Responsibility – Or Does It?, Australasian Journal of Philosophy. Published online: 15 September 2026.
Leave a Reply