FAQ

Promises to Unidentified Individuals

Publication date: 19.12.2018

Principia, 2018, Volume 65, pp. 91 - 111

https://doi.org/10.4467/20843887PI.18.004.9887

Authors

Szymon Osmola
Department of Law European, University Institute in Florence
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0437-0653 Orcid
All publications →

Titles

Promises to Unidentified Individuals

Abstract

Promises to Unidentified Individuals

Summary

Is it possible to make a binding promise to an unidentified individual, i.e. an individual whose identity is unknown to a promisor? The answer to this question seems to be negative, regardless of the philosophical theory of promises one decides to adopt. Particular autonomy theories consider promises to be one of the tools for enhancing morally valuable relationships through recognizing another party's particular personality, which enables individuals to live a better life. The generic autonomy theories consider promises to be a tool facilitating cooperation between strangers. The utilitarian theories consider the practice of promising to be a tool for increasing social welfare. The premises of each of these theories seem to rule out the possibility of promises to unidentified individuals. Accordingly, reflections on this topic may some shed light on some problems related to the issue of the identifiability effect, which is widely discussed in the psychological literature.

Keywords: promise, identified, statistical, identifiability effect, autonomy

The research on this article was funded by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education in Poland, National Program for the Development of Humanities, no. 0068/NPRH4/H2b/83/2016. 

Obietnice składane osobom niezidentyfikowanym

Streszczenie

Czy możliwe jest złożenie wiążącej obietnicy osobie niezidentyfikowanej, to jest osobie, której tożsamość jest składającemu obietnicę nieznana? Odpowiedź na to pytanie wydaje się negatywna, niezależnie od tego, jaką filozoficzną teorię obietnic wyznajemy. Teorie autonomii partykularnej uznają obietnice za jeden ze sposobów nawiązywania moralnie wartościowych relacji poprzez wzajemne rozpoznawanie się autonomicznych i unikalnych podmiotów, co pozwala na prowadzenie lepszego życia. Zwolennicy teorii autonomii uniwersalnej uznają obietnice za narzędzie pozwalające na współpracę pomiędzy obcymi jednostkami. Teorie utylitarystyczne uznają praktykę obiecywania za jeden z instrumentów przyczyniających się do zwiększenia dobrobytu społecznego. Założenia każdej z tych teorii zdają się wykluczać możliwość złożenia skutecznej obietnicy osobie niezidentyfikowanej. Rozważania nad tytułową kwestią mogą również przyczynić się do wyjaśnienia pewnych problemów związanych z szeroko dyskutowanym w literaturze psychologicznej efektem identyfikowalności.

References

Anscombe, Elizabeth. 1978. “Rules, Rights and Promises.” Midwest Studies in Philosophy 3: 318–  323.

Fried, Charles. 1981. Contract as Promise. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Habib, Allen. 2014. “Promises. In The Stanford Encyclopedia  of Philosophy, edited by  Edward N.  Zalta. Spring 2018  Edition. Stanford, CA:  The Metaphysics Research Lab, Center  for  the Study of Language and Information (CSLI), Stanford  University https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2018/entries/promises/.

Hume, David. 2007. A Treatise of Human Nature: A Critical Edition, edited by David Fate Norton, and Mary Norton. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jenni, Karen, and George Loewenstein. 1997. “Explaining the ‘Identifiable Victim Effect’.” Journal  of  Risk and Uncertainty 14:  235–257.

Kimel, Dori. 2003. From Promise to Contract. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kogut Tehila. 2011. “Someone to  blame: When identifying a victim decreases helping.” Journal of  Experimental Social  Psychology 47(4): 748–755.

Kraus, Jody. 2002. “Philosophy of  Contract Law”. In The  Oxford Handbook of  Jurisprudence and Philosophy of  Law,  edited by Jules  Coleman, and  Scott Shapiro, 687–751.  Oxford:  Oxford University Press.

Markovits, Daniel. 2011. “Promise as an Arm’s-length Relation.” In Promises and Agreements. Philosophical Essays, edited by  Hanoch Sheinman, 295–326. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Nordgren, Loran, and Mary McDonnell. 2011. “The Scope-Severity Paradox: Why  Doing More Harm Is  Judged to  Be  Less Harmful.” Social Psychological and Personality Science 2 (1):  97–102.

Paternoster, Ray, and Jerome Deise. 2011. A Heavy Thumb on the Scale: The Effect of Victim Impact Evidence on Capital Decision Making.” Criminology 41 (1):  129–161.

Rawls, John. 1955. “Two Concepts of Rules.” Philosophical Review 64 (1):  3–32.

Ritov, Ilana, and Eyal Zamir. 2014. Affirmative Action and  Other Group Tradeoff Policies: Identifiability of  Those  Adversely Affected.” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 125  (1):  50–60.

Schelling, Thomas. 1968. “The Life  You  Save May  Be  Your  Own.” In Problems in Public Expenditure Analysis, edited by  Samuel Chase, 127–176. Washington: Brookings Institution.

Searle, John. 1969. Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sheinman, Hanoch. 2004. Are Normal Contracts Normal  Promises?” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 24 (3):  517–537.

Sheinman, Hanoch. 2011. “Introduction: Promises and Agreements.” In Promises and Agreements. Philosophical  Essays, edited by Hanoch Sheinman, 3–57. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Shiffrin, Seana. 2008. “Promising, Intimate Relationships, and Conventionalism.” Philosophical Review 117  (4):  481–524.

Small, Deborah. 2015. “On the Psychology of the Identified Victim Effect.” In Identified versus Statistical Persons: An  Interdisciplinary Perspective, edited by I. Glenn Cohen, Norman Daniels, and Nir Eyal, 13–23. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Small, Deborah, and George Loewenstein. 2003. “Helping a Victim or  Helping the Victim: Altruism and Identifiability.” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 26 (1):  5–16.

Small, Deborah, and  George Loewenstein. 2005. “The Devil  You Know: The Effects of Identifiability on Punishment.” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 18 (5):  311–18.

Załuski, Wojciech. 2018. “The Moral Status of Helping and the Identified Victim Effect.” Principia 65:  49–68.

Żuradzki, Tomasz. 2017. “Normatywne implikacje preferencji wobec  osób  zidentyfikowanych.” Diametros 57:  113–136.

Information

Information: Principia, 2018, Volume 65, pp. 91 - 111

Article type: Original article

Titles:

Polish:

Promises to Unidentified Individuals

English:

Promises to Unidentified Individuals

Authors

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0437-0653

Szymon Osmola
Department of Law European, University Institute in Florence
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0437-0653 Orcid
All publications →

Department of Law European, University Institute in Florence

Published at: 19.12.2018

Article status: Open

Licence: CC BY-NC-ND  licence icon

Percentage share of authors:

Szymon Osmola (Author) - 100%

Article corrections:

-

Publication languages:

English

View count: 1774

Number of downloads: 921

<p> Promises to Unidentified Individuals</p>