TY - JOUR
AU1 - McKenna, Michael
AB - Philos Stud (2018) 175:981–988 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-018-1044-4 Shoemaker’s responsibility pluralism: reflections on Responsibility from the Margins Michael McKenna Published online: 30 January 2018 Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018 David Shoemaker’s Responsibility from the Margins (Oxford University Press, 2015) is one of the most important books on the nature of responsibility written since H.L.A. Hart’s Punishment and Responsibility (1968). That’s a span of nearly half a century. Shoemaker wisely focuses on the nature of moral responsibility and sets aside a treatment of the control condition for it. While many books promise to treat moral responsibility thoroughly, most just focus upon the metaphysics of the control condition. So they are mostly about the metaphysics of agency. Shoemaker has made impressive progress by setting this debate aside and turning more directly to moral responsibility’s nature. In this respect, his book is of a piece with such important books as Hart’s, along with Jonathan Glover’s Responsibility (1970), and as well Michael Zimmerman’s An Essay on Moral Responsibility (Zimmerman 1988). That’s impressive company. In what follows, I will raise four objections, but I hasten to add that none detract from the importance and innovation of this excellent book. 1 Challenging Shoemaker’s pluralism 
TI - Shoemaker’s responsibility pluralism: reflections on Responsibility from the Margins
JF - Philosophical Studies
DO - 10.1007/s11098-018-1044-4
DA - 2018-01-30
UR - https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/springer-journals/shoemaker-s-responsibility-pluralism-reflections-on-responsibility-vsvmBS4vN2
SP - 981
EP - 988
VL - 175
IS - 4
DP - DeepDyve
ER -