Addiction and Responsibility 2011
DOI: 10.7551/mitpress/9780262015509.003.0001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Introduction: The Makings of a Responsible Addict

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore, we discuss the thoughts of three critics of the disease model, who propose alternative views, and explicitly address this issue. The following is not meant to provide a complete discussion of addiction and moral responsibility, which would be far beyond the scope of this paper [See 59]. Rather, we seek to illustrate the ambiguity in whether or not alternative models of addiction involve re-moralization.…”
Section: Alternatives To the Disease Model And Their Treatment Of Mormentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, we discuss the thoughts of three critics of the disease model, who propose alternative views, and explicitly address this issue. The following is not meant to provide a complete discussion of addiction and moral responsibility, which would be far beyond the scope of this paper [See 59]. Rather, we seek to illustrate the ambiguity in whether or not alternative models of addiction involve re-moralization.…”
Section: Alternatives To the Disease Model And Their Treatment Of Mormentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Classical approaches to akrasia avoid the stigmatising implications associated with a moralised attitude to failing in self-control. In this respect, they are well suited to address timely concerns about the ‘vindictiveness’ of attribution of responsibility in the context of substance misuse and substance dependence (Poland 2011). Arguably, the classical approaches fare better than recent attempts to sketch a secondary notion of responsibility, such as ‘responsibility without blame’ (Sinnott-Armstrong 2013).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Others are a matter of moral uncertainty, inconclusive research or prospective questions: the ‘what ifs’ of tobacco endgame policy. For example, the degree to which addictive behaviours are driven by ‘choice’ or ‘compulsion’ remains contested 8. This raises the moral question of whether policies should preserve a ‘choice’ to consume tobacco—even if tobacco is in itself a defective product that, when used as intended, kills half of its users—or protect tobacco users from their ‘compulsion’.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%