Accountability in the Moral Nexus

What is the nature of moral accountability? And what does an answer to this question reveal about the correct moral theory? This paper defends the view that moral accountability is inherently relational or bipolar in nature. It does so by seeking to understand a central accountability practice—sincere apology. The paper begins by considering a challenge to a relational or bipolar view of morality, according to which such a theory cannot adequately explain the nature of accountability and its connection to morality without having to invoke non-relational concepts such as ‘moral obligation, period’ and third-personal reason. In answering this challenge, the paper argues that reflection on the practice of sincere apology reveals that appeal to non-relational concepts such as ‘moral obligation, period’ or third-personal reasons is neither necessary nor sufficient in order to adequately account for the nature of moral accountability. What these reflections show instead is that a relational or bipolar understanding of morality is best equipped to give an adequate explanation of the nature of moral accountability.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Erkenntnis
Published
2026-01-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10670-025-01057-w
Primary Topic
Philosophical Ethics and Theory
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Accountability in the Moral Nexus

Jonas Vandieken
Erkenntnis
Philosophical Ethics and Theory
article

Accountability in the Moral Nexus

Jonas Vandieken
article en

Abstract

What is the nature of moral accountability? And what does an answer to this question reveal about the correct moral theory? This paper defends the view that moral accountability is inherently relational or bipolar in nature. It does so by seeking to understand a central accountability practice—sincere apology. The paper begins by considering a challenge to a relational or bipolar view of morality, according to which such a theory cannot adequately explain the nature of accountability and its connection to morality without having to invoke non-relational concepts such as ‘moral obligation, period’ and third-personal reason. In answering this challenge, the paper argues that reflection on the practice of sincere apology reveals that appeal to non-relational concepts such as ‘moral obligation, period’ or third-personal reasons is neither necessary nor sufficient in order to adequately account for the nature of moral accountability. What these reflections show instead is that a relational or bipolar understanding of morality is best equipped to give an adequate explanation of the nature of moral accountability.

Erkenntnis
LMU Klinikum (DE), Nanosystems Initiative Munich (DE), Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
State University of New York, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, University at Albany
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 82%
Philosophical Ethics and Theory
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Accountability in the Moral Nexus — Jonas Vandieken · Erkenntnis (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS