ARTICLE

The Significance of a Duty’s Direction: Claiming Priority Rather than Prioritizing Claims

Volume 7, Number 3, January 2014, Pages 1–29
https://doi.org/10.26556/jesp.v7i3.75

Abstract

Agents do not merely have duties—they often have directed duties to others. This paper first reveals problems with traditional attempts to equate these directed duties with claims and claim rights. It then defends a novel account of directionality that locates the unifying element of directed duties in a counterparty’s prioritization of the duties owed to her. If one agent has a directed duty to another, then the degree to which fulfilling the duty matters to the agent to whom it is owed itself matters—in a distinctive, special and inherent sense. This subject-determined normative significance of directed duties can be used to articulate a priority account of directionality, an account that can demonstrate why many have taken control powers, interests or the authority to demand compliance to be so important in analyzing the directed duties we owe to others.
Copyright © 2014 Marcus Hedahl
|

Forgiveness and Negative Partiality

Joshua Stuchlik Brandt

Grounding Human Rights in Political Conceptions

Bosko Tripkovic

Abuse of Power

Dale Dorsey

Beyond Ought-Implies-Can: Impersonal Obligatoriness Implies Historical Contingency

Peter B. M. Vranas

Letting Animals Off the Hook

Nicolas Delon

Rationality, Shmationality: Even Newer Shmagency Worries

Olof Leffler

The Procedure of Morality

Ori J. Herstein and Ofer Malcai

Alienation and the Metaphysics of Normativity: On the Quality of Our Relations with the World

Jack Samuel

Backsliding and Bad Faith: Aspiration, Disavowal, and (Residual) Practical Identities

Justin F. White

Naturalizing Moral Naturalism

Jessica Isserow

The Red Mist

Maxime Lepoutre

Games Unlike Life: A Reply to Camp and Millgram

C. Thi Nguyen