David and Tamler dip back into the Thomas Nagel well, and discuss the problem of "moral luck." Why do we blame drunk drivers who hit someone more than drunk drivers who make it home OK? Why do we judge people for things that are beyond their control (when we have strong intuitions that uncontrollable acts don't deserve blame)? Does moral luck ultimately swallow all of our behavior? Can we truly embrace the view that "actions are events and people are things" or are we stuck with another unsolvable clash of competing perspectives (just like the problem of absurdity)?

Plus, Dave exposes himself on the Partially Examined Life, Tamler self-censors, and somehow we discuss Hollywood harassment and stand-up comedy without mentioning Louis CK. (But only because we recorded this episode about five hours before the NY Times story broke.)

Support Very Bad Wizards

Links:

• Nagel, T. (2012). Mortal questions. Cambridge University Press. [amazon.com affiliate link]
• Nagel, T. Moral Luck.
• Moral Luck (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
• Intentional stance [wikipedia.org]
• The Partially Examined Life Episode 176 Situationism in Psych: Milgram & Stanford Prison Experiments (Part One) — Part one of the PEL episode with David
• The Partially Examined Life Episode 176 Situationism in Psych: Milgram & Stanford Prison Experiments (Part Two)
• The Partially Examined Life Episode 93: Freedom and Responsibility (Strawson vs Strawson) — Tamler's appearance on PEL