Liability Insurance, Moral Luck, and Auto Accidents
-
Tom Baker
Beginning with the seminal work by Williams and Nagel, moral philosophers have used auto accident hypotheticals to illustrate the phenomenon of moral luck. Moral luck is present in the hypotheticals because (and to the extent that) two equally careless drivers are assessed differently because only one of them caused an accident. This Article considers whether these philosophical discussions might contribute to the public policy debate over compensation for auto accidents. Using liability and insurance practices in the United States as an illustrative example, the Article explains that auto liability insurance substantially mitigates moral luck and argues that, as a result, the moral luck literature is unlikely to make a significant contribution to this public policy debate. The debate would benefit more from philosophical analysis of victims’ luck, which is not as substantially mitigated by liability insurance.
©2011 Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/Boston
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Article
- Luck and Identity
- Luck Between Morality, Law, and Justice
- Closing the Gap
- Two Dimensions of Responsibility in Crime, Tort, and Moral Luck
- Wresting Control from Luck: The Secular Case for Aborted Attempts
- Liability Insurance, Moral Luck, and Auto Accidents
- Lucky in Your Judge
- Luck in the Courts
- How Should Egalitarians Cope with Market Risks?
- Luck Egalitarianism and Political Solidarity
- Decentralized Responses to Good Fortune and Bad Luck
- Forum
- Comment on Dan-Cohen's "Luck and Identity"
- Comment on David Enoch's Luck Between Morality, Law, and Justice
- Mind the Gap: A Reply to Ripstein
- Responsibility and Moral Luck: Comments on Benjamin Zipursky, Two Dimensions of Responsibility in Crime, Tort, and Moral Luck
- A Few Instrumental Thoughts About Luck, Accidents, and Insurance
- A Comment on Jeremy Waldron's "Lucky in Your Judge"
- Lack of Luck in the Courts: A Comment on Menachem Mautner
- Temptations of Pure Procedural Justice: A Comment on Elizabeth Anderson
- Is There a Difference Between Moral Luck and "Plain Luck that Has Moral Implications"?
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Article
- Luck and Identity
- Luck Between Morality, Law, and Justice
- Closing the Gap
- Two Dimensions of Responsibility in Crime, Tort, and Moral Luck
- Wresting Control from Luck: The Secular Case for Aborted Attempts
- Liability Insurance, Moral Luck, and Auto Accidents
- Lucky in Your Judge
- Luck in the Courts
- How Should Egalitarians Cope with Market Risks?
- Luck Egalitarianism and Political Solidarity
- Decentralized Responses to Good Fortune and Bad Luck
- Forum
- Comment on Dan-Cohen's "Luck and Identity"
- Comment on David Enoch's Luck Between Morality, Law, and Justice
- Mind the Gap: A Reply to Ripstein
- Responsibility and Moral Luck: Comments on Benjamin Zipursky, Two Dimensions of Responsibility in Crime, Tort, and Moral Luck
- A Few Instrumental Thoughts About Luck, Accidents, and Insurance
- A Comment on Jeremy Waldron's "Lucky in Your Judge"
- Lack of Luck in the Courts: A Comment on Menachem Mautner
- Temptations of Pure Procedural Justice: A Comment on Elizabeth Anderson
- Is There a Difference Between Moral Luck and "Plain Luck that Has Moral Implications"?
