Do Victims Have Obligations?
Sun Lee

18 January 2018

在这20分钟的播客中，Ashwini Vasanthakumar提出了一个相当挑衅的说法，受害者也有义务。Vasanthakumar声称，虽然受害者可能不应该为被加害者选择为不幸的目标或不幸的环境负责，但一旦他们逃离了眼前的苦难，受害者就会凭借他们的经历处于“认知上的特权地位”。因此，他们通过追究肇事者的责任或告知旁观者和潜在受害者，在恢复正义方面发挥重要作用。

例如，酷刑的受害者可能是唯一知道这种非法活动存在的人，因此有义务通知官员，以防止出现更多的受害者。同样，这一说法表明，性虐待的受害者，尽管在叙述经历时会受到情感创伤和其他不利后果，但有义务报告事件。

这对那些已经经历过可怕经历的受害者是不是要求太多了?

Listen to the podcast here:http://www.philosophy247.org/podcasts/victim/

Comments(1)

Harold G. Neuman's picture

Harold G. Neuman

Wednesday, January 24, 2018 -- 11:44 AM

The victim/obligations

The victim/obligations dichotomy (if dichotomy is the closest description we can muster) is difficult to assess. With so many victims coming forward now in the sexual harassment arena, we have trouble applying the obligation aspect of this matter. Perpetrators, almost universally, deny any guilt, while victims are more likely to be dismissed---especially when they accuse powerful people. When sexual harassment was pushed into the cold light of day in the 1970s and 80s, the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission issued guidelines speaking to the issue, defining it in more-or-less certain terms. It caused barely an eddy in the flow of deceit and abuse. Now, more than 40 years later, no one even mentions the USEEOC, and powerful people thumb their noses at those whom they abuse and humiliate. Obligations are fine if the obligees are able to attain relief. That, regrettably, does not appear to be happening in any consistent way. Or am I missing something?

Tags