The Ontological and Normative Status of Groups

What do we mean when we say a group, like a company or a sports team, does something? Many philosophers see certain groups as more than just collections of individuals, since they have their own beliefs and goals they want to achieve. Others, however, understand group behaviour in terms of the group members beliefs and motivations. This debate is important given the significant roles many groups have in a society. When the legislature passes a law, for example, or when two large companies merge, many people are affected. This raises important moral questions especially concerning who is responsible for a groups actions. Is a company responsible for an environmental disaster, or should we hold individuals within the company responsible? The project will develop a way of understanding groups in terms of individuals acting in response to how they expect other group members to behave. This is an individualist account of groups, but one that takes seriously that people think and act differently depending on their social environment. Groups may not act on the judgments their members hold as separate individuals. The projects aim, however, is to show how we can nonetheless explain group decisions and actions by considering how individuals pursue their own goals within their environment. How people behave how they express an opinion, for example will usually depend on how they expect others to respond, and how it contributes to collective action. Group behaviour is thus reducible to individual behaviour, but in a way that appreciates that individuals behaviour is shaped by others around them. This account of group behaviour leads to a view of moral issues, especially concerning the responsibility for consequences of groups actions. If groups can make and act on decisions not reflecting their members judgments, we may think group members do not control their groups behaviour, and the group itself is therefore responsible. But when we appreciate that individuals can and should act with a concern for how their actions combine with others actions, we see that what they morally ought to do depends on how their actions contribute to a collective action. This gives us a way of holding individuals responsible for groups behaviour. So, when a company does something morally unacceptable, we should seek to assign responsibility to individuals who should have prevented it from doing what it did.