Addiction is often thought of as an excusing condition. All else being equal, addicts who commit crimes to procure drugs are usually seen as less blameworthy than non-addicted criminals. But what, if anything, makes addiction an excusing condition? Some people think that addicts are excused from their drug-related behavior because their cravings are (supposedly) irresistible. I argue that even if an addict’s cravings are irresistible, that would not in and of itself excuse her from her drug-related behavior. In order for an addict to be excused from her drug-related behavior, her behavior has to be at odds with what she really cares about. The irresistibility or strength of an addict’s desire for drugs is morally relevant only insofar as it helps explain why the addict used drugs despite caring more about not using drugs at the time of action. This approach allows us to see addicts as suffering from a disease for which they need help without necessarily relieving them of responsibility for their behavior. The friends and family of addicts therefore need not feel guilty for resenting addicts for mistreating them. Addicts can be responsible for their behavior even if they suffer from a disease that makes resisting their cravings for drugs difficult for them.
Paul, Klumpe Andrew,
"Addiction and Responsibility"
(2013).
Philosophy Theses and Dissertations.
Brown Digital Repository. Brown University Library.
https://doi.org/10.7301/Z0H41PRM
