Key Arguments

• Clare’s reply shifts the focus: 'In most cases, when someone acts wrongly, he deserves to be blamed, and should feel remorse. This is what is most plausible in the doctrine that ought implies can.' The intuitive force of 'ought implies can' is tied to the avoidability of blameworthy action, not to the sheer impossibility of ever doing anything wrong.
• She stresses the implausibility of ubiquitous blameworthiness: 'It is hard to believe that there could be cases where, whatever someone does, or might have earlier done, he deserves to be blamed, and should feel remorse. It is hard to believe that it could be impossible for someone to avoid acting in a way that deserves to be blamed.'
• Clare then characterizes her own case as 'blameless wrongdoing': 'If I saved my child rather than several strangers, I would believe that I am doing what will make the outcome much worse. I would therefore believe that I am acting wrongly. But this would be a case of blameless wrongdoing.'
• She concludes that C satisfies the credible core of 'ought implies can': 'According to C, we can always avoid doing what deserves to be blamed. This is enough to satisfy the doctrine that ought implies can.' In other words, C does not imply that there are unavoidable blameworthy acts; it allows that some wrong acts are inevitable but blameless.

Source Quotes

Since ought implies can, C’s claim is indefensible.’ Clare could answer: ‘In most cases, when someone acts wrongly, he deserves to be blamed, and should feel remorse. This is what is most plausible in the doctrine that ought implies can.

Clare could answer: ‘In most cases, when someone acts wrongly, he deserves to be blamed, and should feel remorse. This is what is most plausible in the doctrine that ought implies can. It is hard to believe that there could be cases where, whatever someone does, or might have earlier done, he deserves to be blamed, and should feel remorse.

This is what is most plausible in the doctrine that ought implies can. It is hard to believe that there could be cases where, whatever someone does, or might have earlier done, he deserves to be blamed, and should feel remorse. It is hard to believe that it could be impossible for someone to avoid acting in a way that deserves to be blamed.

C does not imply this belief. If I saved my child rather than several strangers, I would believe that I am doing what will make the outcome much worse. I would therefore believe that I am acting wrongly. But this would be a case of blameless wrongdoing. According to C, we can always avoid doing what deserves to be blamed.

But this would be a case of blameless wrongdoing. According to C, we can always avoid doing what deserves to be blamed. This is enough to satisfy the doctrine that ought implies can.’ We may believe that these claims do not sufficiently meet this objection.

Key Concepts

• Clare could answer: ‘In most cases, when someone acts wrongly, he deserves to be blamed, and should feel remorse.
• This is what is most plausible in the doctrine that ought implies can.
• It is hard to believe that there could be cases where, whatever someone does, or might have earlier done, he deserves to be blamed, and should feel remorse.
• If I saved my child rather than several strangers, I would believe that I am doing what will make the outcome much worse. I would therefore believe that I am acting wrongly. But this would be a case of blameless wrongdoing.
• According to C, we can always avoid doing what deserves to be blamed. This is enough to satisfy the doctrine that ought implies can.’

Context

Middle of section 15, where Parfit uses Clare’s voice to reinterpret 'ought implies can' in terms of avoidable blameworthiness, defending Consequentialism by allowing inevitable but blameless wrongdoing and preserving the intuitive core of the doctrine.