ABSTRACT
Can large social groups be morally responsible for the direct actions of a few members? If so, how? Approaching the collective responsibility debate through the lens of narrative, I formulate and defend answers to such questions. First, I highlight some assumptions of the collective responsibility debate, especially its reliance on standard conceptions of the individual moral subject. Next, I combine a family of views into what I call the “narrative approach” and explain how the narrative approach impacts those assumptions. I ultimately argue that taking the narrative approach enables us to assign shared responsibility (a distributed form of group-related responsibility) for things like hate crime. I conclude that if group members wish to avoid shared responsibility, they must work to alter harmful group narratives. I further note how taking a narrative approach affects the issues of collective punishment, collective apology, and collective akrasia.
