pull down to refresh

Thoughts on Thomas Nagel’s MORAL LUCK
Most of us are untested. Each of us has a certain set of traits, beliefs, and moral values. Some are patient, generous, and brave. Some are vengeful, miserly, and cowardly. But, most of the time, we don’t know which we are. We cruise through life with no real opportunity to be good and no opportunity to be bad. Two examples:
Norma dislikes her husband. She thinks nothing of hurting him and thinks she deserves better. She’s ready to be unfaithful, but she is never in a situation when she can be. Norma is never away on a work trip. She’s never alone in a bar. An attractive stranger never gives her the eye. Norma never cheats on her husband because she never has the opportunity to.
Fritz is a gentle, softly spoken history graduate from Freiberg. He’s a kind son and has never done anything wrong. When the Nazis come to power in the 1930s, he finds himself tumbling through the system. He gets an easy job; Fritz hates to rock the boat. By 1941, he’s a guard at Auschwitz. He’s party to one of the evillest moments in human history. Fritz was tested by 1930s Germany, and he failed.
There are Normas and Fritzs all over the world, and the reason we say Norma is a good, faithful wife while Fritz is a fascist monster is because of moral luck. Norma had it. Fritz didn’t.
In his essay on moral luck, Thomas Nagel argued that we should give more attention to how far moral success or failure is determined by factors beyond our control. A young man driving recklessly through a red light is immoral. But if a pedestrian is walking across the road, gets hit and is killed, then the man's crime is of a different order.
A parent who “runs to get a towel” while leaving the baby in the bath is foolish. If the baby drowns in those moments, the parent is a monster.
Nagel points out that when you focus in on these uncontrollable factors, you realise how far “genuine agency and moral judgement seem to shrink.” Your moral values are either genetic or cultural – either way, not within your power. Your moral actions will either be very good or very bad based upon the luck of the universe – not within your power.
Mini Philosophy
As the Mighty Mighty Bosstones sang, "I'm not a coward, I've just never been tested."
Moral luck (based on your summary; haven't read Nagel) isn't much different than other kinds. Someone born into money can never demonstrate they have the power to pull themselves up from the bottom, someone with a loving family can never show they can overcome the same adversity as an orphan, etc.
There's a good question, though, of whether morality is thought- or action-based. Is Norma immoral, or if she found herself with an opportunity to cheat, would she be forced to confront what might have been a fantasy up to that point and reevaluate it as a moral question?
(I suspect the answer's different for different Normas, of course.)
reply