EthicAtlas — Explore the questions behind the world

A LIVING MAP OF MORAL IDEAS

Loading the map…

Idea

Moral luck

Outcomes and circumstances beyond our control can influence how we are praised or blamed.

Understanding the topic

Moral luck concerns cases where praise, blame, or moral significance depends on factors outside an agent’s control. Discussions distinguish luck in outcomes, circumstances, constitution, and the causal history of choices. The pressure comes from holding people responsible while recognizing how deeply their opportunities and dispositions depend on chance.

Resultant luck concerns what follows from a choice; circumstantial luck concerns the situations someone encounters; constitutive luck concerns the character and capacities with which they act. These forms overlap but create different comparisons. A person may never face a severe test, or may possess habits formed under conditions they did not choose. The question is how moral evaluation can remain meaningful while recognizing that agency develops and operates within circumstances that no individual fully controls.

Explore the example and debate

An illustrative example

Imagine equally honest people facing different opportunities to betray a friend. One is severely tested while the other never encounters temptation. Judging their character from their visible records alone may overlook a difference in circumstances rather than a difference in commitment.

Where the debate stands

One response limits blame to what was controlled; another questions whether control can be isolated so neatly. The problem reaches beyond punishment to gratitude, regret, and self-understanding. An account may also distinguish an agent’s responsibility for repairing a result from the blame warranted by the quality of their original choice.

A useful exercise writes three separate judgments: how reasonable the choice was, what harm occurred, and what response is now owed. The same unlucky event can affect the second and third without changing the first. Some moral practices may nevertheless respond to outcomes, such as expressing regret toward an injured person. The debate becomes sharper when it asks which practice is justified, rather than requiring one undifferentiated verdict about whether luck should matter.

Background referencesMoral Luck

Read the full topic

A deeper angle

Nagel distinguishes luck in results, circumstances, character, and causes. Each pressures the idea that moral assessment should depend only on what we control.

If luck reaches even our character, what is left for praise and blame?Explore the source: Moral Luck

CONNECTIONS 6

View all 6 connections and context

Connection context

Explore why an actual injury may change our assessment even when the risk-taking was the same.

Connection context

Nagel distinguishes several ways that luck enters moral assessment.

Connection context

Williams’s discussion challenges the idea that moral assessment can be insulated from luck.

Connection context

Moral luck creates tension with the principle that blame should depend on control.

Connection context

(This is one reading of Bernard William’s famous discussion of moral luck, where non-moral reasons seemingly can trump moral reasons (Williams 1975, 1981); this is also a strategy some consequentialists (e.g., Portmore 2003) seize as well in order to handle the demandingness and alienation problems endemic to consequentialism.) But like the preceding strategy, this one seems desperate.

Automatically found mention; does not imply agreement.

Read source passage

(This is one reading of Bernard William’s famous discussion of moral luck, where non-moral reasons seemingly can trump moral reasons (Williams 1975, 1981); this is also a strategy some consequentialists (e.g., Portmore 2003) seize as well in order to handle the demandingness and alienation problems endemic to consequentialism.) But like the preceding strategy, this one seems desperate.

Open reference article Retrieved 2026-10-01 · Automatically found mention

Connection context

His second book, Problems of the Self (= PS; 1973), was a collection of his philosophical papers from 1956 to 1972; his further collections of essays ( Moral Luck , 1981, and Making Sense of Humanity , 1998) were as much landmarks in the literature as this first collection.

Automatically found mention; does not imply agreement.

Read source passage

His second book, Problems of the Self (= PS; 1973), was a collection of his philosophical papers from 1956 to 1972; his further collections of essays ( Moral Luck , 1981, and Making Sense of Humanity , 1998) were as much landmarks in the literature as this first collection.

Open reference article Retrieved 2026-10-02 · Automatically found mention