VICTIM BLAMING IN LIGHT OF STRAWSON’S NATURALISTIC THEORY OF MORALITY

Abstract

The relevance of the topic of this paper is due to the insufficient study of the influence of Strawson’s naturalistic theory of morality on modern jurisprudence and philosophy of law. This comprehensive paper explores Peter Strawson’s naturalistic theory of morality, delving into the phenomena of victim blaming and its ancient roots in mythological contexts. It begins by assessing Strawson’s fundamental works, “Freedom and Resentment” (1962) and “Social Morality and Individual Ideal” (1961), elucidating how human emotional attitudes and moral accountability underpin society’s moral fabric. The subject of the study is to analyze the ways of using moral argumentation and its boundaries in justifying the phenomena of victim blaming. The purpose of the work is to theoretically examine the connection of victim blaming within modern societal attitudes to ancient mythologies, revealing a profound enduring narrative thread. The novelty of the topic is due to the lack of studies in the educational and scientific literature on the specifics of the argumentation of victim blaming in modern legal philosophy, the need to rethink traditional ideas about the philosophical grounds of the criminal law, especially how the belief in divine will and a deity’s alignment with the perpetrator of violence, embedded within archaic societies, resonates within the victim blaming paradigm. By examining the concept of sacrifice in both well-known and obscure myths, the paper explains the purposeful nature of victimhood, and its societal implications. It further evaluates the philosophical and cultural dimensions of violence in archaic societies, deconstructing how violence was considered divine in such contexts. The intersection of victim blaming and moral responsibility is then examined, particularly how they influence societal attitudes and legal frameworks. The research methods characteristic of analytical jurisprudence, including those related to the use of methods of logical and linguistic analysis, as well as special legal methods (formal legal method of interpretation of regulatory prescriptions) were used. The paper concludes with a synthesis of these insights, reflecting on their implications for understanding Strawson’s naturalistic theory of morality. It offers significant conclusions about the complex relationships between morality, victim blaming, and societal norms, emphasizing the theory’s utility in comprehending the nature and impacts of victim blaming.