Miller addresses the issue of individuals’ need to be responsible for the suffering of others whose basic rights have not been protected. According to Miller, people should step in during such situations and provide resources that would abate the suffering. This form of accountability has been defined as remedial responsibility. Further, Miller goes ahead to explain the concepts of remedial responsibility that can be applied in the situations that require an individual’s intervention when another one is in need. There are four principles explained here, and they include moral responsibility, causal responsibility, community, and capacity.
First, the labeling of an individual as causally responsible for the suffering of another person after …show more content…
According to Miller, the moral blame would be placed on the agent due to the role they played in the suffering of others. The identification of the agent responsible for P’s suffering could sometimes be a difficult process, yet Miller implies that it is always possible to single out the agent. Taking the example given in the article, when a person starves due to a terminal disease or the failure of his crops, agents whose actions could have prevented this can be identified. For this case, it may be said that the provision of medicine or the installation of an irrigation system could have abated the …show more content…
The forward-looking theories have been described as the assessment of P’s condition to find out who is responsible then relieving the victims through a remedy by the agent. On the other hand, backward-looking theories blame the agents for any suffering that may occur to P.
In the event that the principle of causal or community responsibility is invoked when the morally responsible agent is incapable of remedying the situation, then this will be unfair. Miller also implies that the change of principles applied to remedy the suffering of an individual may be done when the morally responsible agent cannot be identified. However, for both cases, assigning community or causal responsibility amounts to blaming the wrong parties on the misfortunes of
First, the labeling of an individual as causally responsible for the suffering of another person after …show more content…
According to Miller, the moral blame would be placed on the agent due to the role they played in the suffering of others. The identification of the agent responsible for P’s suffering could sometimes be a difficult process, yet Miller implies that it is always possible to single out the agent. Taking the example given in the article, when a person starves due to a terminal disease or the failure of his crops, agents whose actions could have prevented this can be identified. For this case, it may be said that the provision of medicine or the installation of an irrigation system could have abated the …show more content…
The forward-looking theories have been described as the assessment of P’s condition to find out who is responsible then relieving the victims through a remedy by the agent. On the other hand, backward-looking theories blame the agents for any suffering that may occur to P.
In the event that the principle of causal or community responsibility is invoked when the morally responsible agent is incapable of remedying the situation, then this will be unfair. Miller also implies that the change of principles applied to remedy the suffering of an individual may be done when the morally responsible agent cannot be identified. However, for both cases, assigning community or causal responsibility amounts to blaming the wrong parties on the misfortunes of