The objective stance and the boundary problem

Abstract

This paper investigates some unexplored ambivalences of Strawson's distinction between the participant stance marked by reactive attitudes and the objective stance in which such attitudes are deemed inappropriate. First, a distinction between recipient-oriented and agent-oriented reasons for

Individual Responsibility under Systemic Corruption: A Coercion-Based View

“…The approach taken in this article does not exclude these and other views in the debate, which can illuminate different aspects of the problem. 6 The conditions of responsible moral agency are importantly defined in terms of the norms about the boundaries of the moral community, seeBagnoli 2007, andBagnoli 2021.Individual Responsibility under Systemic Corruption…”

The struggle for recognition and the authority of the second person

“…This points us to ways in which the objective stance can be employed for strategic reasons. As Bagnoli develops, the divide between the two stances thus is a matter of contestation and negotiation, giving rise to a “complex dynamics of recognition through which the boundaries of the moral community are negotiated” (Bagnoli, 2021, p. 647). Attending to this divide can therefore give us new resources for understanding the struggle for recognition and shine a light on oppressive forms of withholding reactive attitudes and of neutralizing others by objectifying them.…”