Social Power is the relative control over the outcome of oneself and others (Fiske & Berdahl, 2007). Power can be interpreted differently, which in turn can have a big impact on the power...Show moreSocial Power is the relative control over the outcome of oneself and others (Fiske & Berdahl, 2007). Power can be interpreted differently, which in turn can have a big impact on the power holders and on the ones who experience the expressed power (Keltner et. al., 2003). The literature distinguishes between power as opportunity and power as responsibility (De Wit et al., 2017). Moreover, stereo- typical gender differences especially affect women as they keep them from reaching leadership pos- itions (Tabassum & Nayak, 2021). However, not only gender affects behavior, also our socio-eco- nomic status can influences a life significantly. The change in socio-economic status is called social mobility (Reforms, 2010). A restricted social mobility seem to keep individuals from reaching lead- ership positions (Brown, 2013). Self-reports on power construal were collected with overall n= 227 respondents to find out about the possible differences in how men and women interpret power. The results show that self-identified females do interpret power more as responsibility than self-identi- fied males do. Both self-identified genders did not differ on construing power as opportunity. Fur- thermore, the study showed that social mobility has no effect on how power is interpreted. Never- theless, the current SES of an individual seems to have a small effect on how power is perceived. The current study highlights the importance of understanding the relationship between gender, so- cial mobility, and power construal and the necessity for further research.Show less
Luck egalitarianism is a theory that follows from Dworkin. It is an interesting theory of distributive justice which states that differences in wealth are allowed when based on differences in...Show moreLuck egalitarianism is a theory that follows from Dworkin. It is an interesting theory of distributive justice which states that differences in wealth are allowed when based on differences in ambition. Differences based on endowments are not allowed. The original formulation of luck egalitarianism by Dworkin has three problems: the harsh treatment problem, a distributive paradigm and the background inequalities problem. This dissertation tries to reformulate luck egalitarianism in a responsibility sensitive way in order to overcome the three problems. The conclusion of this dissertation is that the responsibility sensitive interpretation of luck egalitarianism comes closer to solving the problems than Dworkin's original formulation, however the responsibility sensitive interpretation does not solve all of the problems.Show less
The decreased importance of the state, increased financialization, and growing power of multinationalcorporations have led to a shift of the responsibilities of the state, and a subsequent change...Show moreThe decreased importance of the state, increased financialization, and growing power of multinationalcorporations have led to a shift of the responsibilities of the state, and a subsequent change in the way in which different regimes legitimize their rule. The responsibilities of a regime, and the legitimacy it has are closely related in this regard. The research question that this thesis will aim to answer then is the following: "what is the influence of a regimes source of legitimacy on the responsibilities is has and the attitude the regime adopts vis-à-vis globalisation? For this purpose various theories on globalisation have been brought together in a theoretical model. This model is also tested and applied on Latin America in order to assess the relevance and applicability on non western economies.Show less
A thesis about individual responsibility for collective action problems and more specifically anthropogenic global climate change. This thesis tries to refute claims made by Walter Sinnott...Show moreA thesis about individual responsibility for collective action problems and more specifically anthropogenic global climate change. This thesis tries to refute claims made by Walter Sinnott-Armstrong on individual causal inefficacy.Show less
This thesis compares the ethics and phenomenology of Nietzsche and Levinas. It begins from a Levinasian critique of Nietzsche, made up of remarks Levinas made on Nietzsche's thought throughout his...Show moreThis thesis compares the ethics and phenomenology of Nietzsche and Levinas. It begins from a Levinasian critique of Nietzsche, made up of remarks Levinas made on Nietzsche's thought throughout his career. This critique is then systematized, before being rebutted by a Nietzschean response, focusing on the question of responsibility. The thesis argues that insofar as there is a disagreement between Nietzsche and Levinas, it is fundamentally a phenomenological disagreement.Show less
This essay locates the “ontological difference” in Heidegger and Levinas in order to show how this difference presents a limitation in both philosophies. On the one hand, the “ontological...Show moreThis essay locates the “ontological difference” in Heidegger and Levinas in order to show how this difference presents a limitation in both philosophies. On the one hand, the “ontological difference” obstructs genuine thinking of be-ing in Heidegger. On the other, this difference is unable to signify the ultimate in Levinas’ ethics. In transgressing the “ontological difference”, both philosophers introduce the concept of the call that leads into two different notions of responsibility in terms of responding. Whereas Heidegger’s historical thinking of be-ing is an originary ethics in which responsibility is determined as responsiveness of Dasein to be-ing, Levinas’ ethics implies responsibility because of social relationship to the transcendent other person who is otherwise than being. In this essay, it is claimed that these two different notions of responsibility are not mutually exclusive. The very openness of be-ing in which Dasein and be-ing are enowned to each other in the counter-resonance of needing and belonging still admits for a Levinassian ethics of the transcendent other person, albeit not primordially.Show less
In recent years, distributive justice has been increasingly concerned with the elimination of disadvantages for which individuals are not responsible. Ideally, these misfortunes should be relieved...Show moreIn recent years, distributive justice has been increasingly concerned with the elimination of disadvantages for which individuals are not responsible. Ideally, these misfortunes should be relieved by those whose fortune is not their responsibility. This is the core of responsibility-egalitarianism. This thesis asks how can it be possible that a society accomplishes a responsibility-egalitarian distribution of economic inequalities. More specifically, I discuss the real-world possibility of (re)distributing economic inequalities according to a specific version of responsibility-egalitarianism. If possible, this version would ensure that all disadvantaged individuals are able to avoid the economic disadvantages they face. I use Ronald Dworkin´s proposal for equality of resources as an example of this responsibility-egalitarian distribution and assess its application in the real-world by means of taxation. My thesis is that a responsibility-egalitarian distribution of economic inequalities is possible by means of a new form of progressive income taxation. Establishing this scheme gives individuals the real ability of choosing to avoid misfortunate economic circumstances.Show less
This thesis seeks to explore the relation between psychological coping mechanisms and moral responsibility. It argues that there are three essential conditions guiding this relation: in order to be...Show moreThis thesis seeks to explore the relation between psychological coping mechanisms and moral responsibility. It argues that there are three essential conditions guiding this relation: in order to be morally responsible individuals must (1) be aware of a moral demand, (2) be aware of the morally relevant state of affairs, and (3) must to some degree have the physical and motivational ability to act upon this awareness. In specific, the view that motivational ability is an important factor in thinking about moral responsibility is defended in this thesis. Only by taking motivational ability into account, can we think about morality in a way that is both sufficiently realistic, while also satisfactorily idealistic.Show less
Can we be free and morally responsible in a determined world? One of the main debates about this question is between the compatibilists and the incompatibilists. The compatibilists state that we...Show moreCan we be free and morally responsible in a determined world? One of the main debates about this question is between the compatibilists and the incompatibilists. The compatibilists state that we can be free and responsible in a determined world, where the incompatibilists state that we can’t be free in a determined world, and need to find a different solution. In this paper I will answer the question: Which of the two views has a more adequate attitude towards free will and responsibility in a determined world? I will come to the conclusion that we can't be free in a determined world, but that this doesn't mean we can't be held responsible for our actions.Show less
This thesis offers an ethical reading of J.M. Coetzee’s The Childhood of Jesus. Taking Derek Attridge’s concept of ‘the singularity of literature’ as its point of departure, it first discusses the...Show moreThis thesis offers an ethical reading of J.M. Coetzee’s The Childhood of Jesus. Taking Derek Attridge’s concept of ‘the singularity of literature’ as its point of departure, it first discusses the relation between literature and ethics. According to Attridge, the singularity of a literary work consists of its ‘transformative difference’. As such, the event of reading is a confrontation with the otherness of the text. It is precisely this confrontation that characterises responsible and ethical reading. Then it is argued that allegorical readings of The Childhood of Jesus cannot do justice to its singularity. Instead, the reading of the novel proposed here focuses on the notion of ‘responsibility’, suggesting that a focus on this concept increases the understanding of ethics in the novel. This analysis connects responsibility to four closely related aspects: its ground, the characters' worldview, the 'idea of the family', and the role of learning. By doing so, it demonstrates the possibilities of applying Attridge's theory to a work of literature, but it also shows its limitations.Show less
