Text 1: Philosopher Dr. Anna Wells defends moral luck skepticism. "Praise and blame should track what agents control," Wells argues. "Outcomes affected by luck shouldn't influence moral assessment. Only intentions matter morally."
Text 2: Philosopher Dr. Paul Black observes that luck affects our judgments nonetheless. "We blame drunk drivers more severely if they kill someone than if they arrive safely," Black notes. "Our actual moral practices incorporate outcome luck. Pure control-based assessment contradicts intuition."
What tension does Black identify between Wells's principle and actual moral practice?
That drunk driving is never dangerous
That people actually judge based on outcomes that agents don't control
That intentions have no moral relevance
That moral luck doesn't exist
Correct Answer: B
Choice B is the correct answer. Wells's principle excludes luck. Black notes we actually judge differently based on outcomes the agent couldn't control. Practice violates the principle.
- Evidence: Black: we blame more when outcomes are worse.
- Reasoning: Actual judgments incorporate luck Wells would exclude.
- Conclusion: Practice and principle diverge on outcome-based assessment.
Choice A is incorrect because both discuss drunk driving harms. Choice C is incorrect because Black doesn't reject intentions. Choice D is incorrect because Black's examples demonstrate luck.