When Outcomes Beyond Your Control Determine Your Blame
We believe morality should be the one arena where luck has no power. Yet philosophers Thomas Nagel and Bernard Williams showed that our moral judgments are deeply affected by luck.
Let's test this with a thought experiment.
Both drivers made identical choices. Both took the same risk.
The only difference is whether a child happened to be on the roadβ
something neither driver could control.
They made identical choices.
They took identical risks.
The only difference was luckβ
whether a child happened to be there.
If this principle is true, the two drivers deserve equal blame.
But almost everyone blames Driver B more. That's the paradox.
We want to believe that morality is fairβ
that what matters is your choices, not the random outcomes.
Yet our moral intuitions don't work that way.
As Nagel wrote: "We may be persuaded that these moral judgments are irrational,
but they reappear involuntarily as soon as the argument is over."