How a pure risk of harm can itself be a harm: A reply to Rowe

Analysis 84 (1):112-116 (2024)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Rowe has recently argued that pure risk of harm cannot itself be a harm. I respond to Rowe and argue that given an appropriate understanding of objective probabilities, pure objective risk of harm can itself be a harm.

Similar books and articles

Can a risk of harm itself be a harm?Thomas Rowe - 2022 - Analysis 81 (4):694-701.
On the Harm of Imposing Risk of Harm.Kritika Maheshwari - 2021 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 24 (4):965-980.
When the Risk of Harm Harms.Adriana Placani - 2017 - Law and Philosophy 36 (1):77-100.
‘But You Could Have Hurt Me!’: Risk and Harm.Joseph Bowen - 2022 - Law and Philosophy 41 (4):517-546.
"Making More Sense of" Minimal Risk".Deborah Barnbaum - 2002 - IRB: Ethics & Human Research 24 (3):10-13.
The moral limits of the criminal law.Joel Feinberg - 1984 - New York: Oxford University Press.
What’s wrong with risk?Tom Parr & Adam Slavny - 2019 - Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 8 (2):76-85.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-05-26

Downloads
315 (#63,629)

6 months
145 (#24,247)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

H. Orri Stefansson
Stockholm University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references