Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. The Medical Exception to the Prohibition of Killing: A Matter of the Right Intention?Govert Den Hartogh - 2019 - Ratio Juris 32 (2):157-176.
    It has long been thought that by using morphine to alleviate the pain of a dying patient, a doctor runs the risk of causing his death. In all countries this kind of killing is explicitly or silently permitted by the law. That permission is usually explained by appealing to the doctrine of double effect: If the use of morphine shortens life, that is only an unintended side effect. The paper evaluates this view, finding it flawed beyond repair and proposing an (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Byproducts, Side-Effects, and the Law of War.Jacob Bronsther - forthcoming - Criminal Law and Philosophy:1-23.
    The Doctrine of Double Effect (DDE) provides that, all else equal, intentional deaths are harder to justify than merely foreseen deaths. The principle is meant to ground the distinction within humanitarian law between terror bombing and strategic bombing. However, according to the “closeness problem,” terror bombers are not necessarily intentional killers. Terror bombing strictly requires only that the civilians appear dead, goes the argument, such that—for a “sophisticated” terror bomber—the civilians’ deaths could be unintended side-effects of making them appear dead. (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Doctrine of Double Effect and Killing Animals for Food.Lukas Tank & Stefanie Thiele - 2019 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 32 (2):239-253.
    Producing food on a large scale without killing any animals seems currently impossible. This poses a challenge for deontological positions that involve a prohibition against killing sentient creatures: it seems that according to these positions omnivorous, vegetarian and vegan diets all rely on food produced in impermissible ways. In order to meet this challenge, deontologists might introduce consequentialist considerations into their theories, for example some principles that effectively require to kill as few animals as possible. This is the kind of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Secret to the Success of the Doctrine of Double Effect : Biased Framing, Inadequate Methodology, and Clever Distractions.Uwe Steinhoff - 2018 - The Journal of Ethics 22 (3-4):235-263.
    There are different formulations of the doctrine of double effect, and sometimes philosophers propose “revisions” or alternatives, like the means principle, for instance. To demonstrate that such principles are needed in the first place, one would have to compare cases in which all else is equal and show that the difference in intuitions, if any, can only be explained by the one remaining difference and thus by the principle in question. This is not the methodology defenders of the DDE and (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Bennett, intention and the DDE – The sophisticated bomber as pseudo-problem.Uwe Steinhoff - 2018 - Analysis 78 (1):73-80.
    Arguing against the doctrine of double effect, Bennett claims that the terror bomber only intends to make his victims appear dead. An obvious reply is that he intends to make them appear dead by killing them. I argue that the alleged refutations of this reply rest on a mistaken test question to determine what an agent intends, as Bennett's own test question confirms, and that Bennett is misled by confusing metaphorical death and literal death. Moreover, Bennett's argument is half-hearted anyway, (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The accomplishment of plans: a new version of the principle of double effect.Alexander R. Pruss - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 165 (1):49-69.
    The classical principle of double effect offers permissibility conditions for actions foreseen to lead to evil outcomes. I shall argue that certain kinds of closeness cases, as well as general heuristic considerations about the order of explanation, lead us to replace the intensional concept of intention with the extensional concept of accomplishment in double effect.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • So Close, Yet So Far: Why Solutions to the Closeness Problem for the Doctrine of Double Effect Fall Short.Dana Kay Nelkin & Samuel C. Rickless - 2015 - Noûs 49 (2):376-409.
    According to the classical Doctrine of Double Effect, there is a morally significant difference between intending harm and merely foreseeing harm. Versions of DDE have been defended in a variety of creative ways, but there is one difficulty, the so-called “closeness problem”, that continues to bedevil all of them. The problem is that an agent's intention can always be identified in such a fine-grained way as to eliminate an intention to harm from almost any situation, including those that have been (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   17 citations  
  • Principles of policing and principles of punishment.Christopher Nathan - 2016 - Legal Theory 22 (3-4):181-204.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Yaffe's attempts.Michael S. Moore - 2013 - Legal Theory 19 (2):136-177.
    Yaffe's handling of two general questions is assessed in this review. The first question is why mere attempts (as opposed to successful wrongdoing) should be made punishable in a well-conceived criminal code. The second question is how attempt liability should be conceived in such a code. As to the first question, Yaffe's nonsubstantive mode of answering it (in terms of his ) is contrasted to answers based on some more substantive desert-bases; Yaffe's own more substantive kind of answer (in terms (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Four friendly critics: A response: Four friendly critics: A response.Michael S. Moore - 2012 - Legal Theory 18 (4):491-542.
    In this reply, I seek to summarize fairly the criticisms advanced by each of my four critics, Jonathan Schaffer, Gideon Yaffe, John Gardner, and Carolina Sartorio. That there is so little overlap either in the aspects of the book on which they focus or in the arguments they advance about those issues has forced me to reply to each of them separately. Schaffer focuses much of his criticisms on my view that absences cannot serve as causal relata and argues that (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The Closeness Problem and the Doctrine of Double Effect: A Way Forward.S. Matthew Liao - 2016 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 10 (4):849-863.
    A major challenge to the Doctrine of Double Effect is the concern that an agent’s intention can be identified in such a fine-grained way as to eliminate an intention to harm from a putative example of an intended harm, and yet, the resulting case appears to be a case of impermissibility. This is the so-called “closeness problem.” Many people believe that one can address the closeness problem by adopting Warren Quinn’s version of the DDE, call it DDE*, which distinguishes between (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Not as a Means: Killing as a Side Effect in Self‐defense.Kerah Gordon-Solmon - 2019 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 100 (4):1074-1090.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • End-of-life decisions and moral psychology: Killing, letting die, intention and foresight. [REVIEW]Charles Douglas - 2009 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 6 (3):337-347.
    In contemplating any life and death moral dilemma, one is often struck by the possible importance of two distinctions; the distinction between killing and “letting die”, and the distinction between an intentional killing and an action aimed at some other outcome that causes death as a foreseen but unintended “side-effect”. Many feel intuitively that these distinctions are morally significant, but attempts to explain why this might be so have been unconvincing. In this paper, I explore the problem from an explicitly (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Retracted article: Strategic bombing, causal beliefs, and double effect.Ezio Di Nucci - 2016 - Journal of Value Inquiry 50 (2):385-394.
    I argue against the Doctrine of Double Effect’s explanation of the moral difference between terror bombing and strategic bombing. I show that the standard thought-experiment of terror bombing and strategic bombing which dominates this debate is underdetermined with regards to the agents’ psychologies: (a) if Terror Bomber and Strategic Bomber have the same causal beliefs, then why does Terror Bomber set out to kill the children? It may then be this unwarranted and immoral choice and not the Doctrine of Double (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Lethal Organ Donation: Would the Doctor Intend the Donor’s Death?Ben Bronner - 2019 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 44 (4):442-458.
    Lethal organ donation is a hypothetical procedure in which vital organs are removed from living donors, resulting in their death. An important objection to lethal organ donation is that it would infringe the prohibition on doctors intentionally causing the death of patients. I present a series of arguments intended to undermine this objection. In a case of lethal organ donation, the donor’s death is merely foreseen, and not intended.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Just War Theory: Revisionists Vs Traditionalists.Seth Lazar - 2017 - Annual Review of Political Science 20:37-54.
    Contemporary just war theory is divided into two broad camps: revisionists and traditionalists. Traditionalists seek to provide moral foundations for something close to current international law, and in particular the laws of armed conflict. Although they propose improvements, they do so cautiously. Revisionists argue that international law is at best a pragmatic fiction—it lacks deeper moral foundations. In this article, I present the contemporary history of analytical just war theory, from the origins of contemporary traditionalist just war theory in Michael (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Don't Ask, Look! Linguistic Corpora as a Tool for Conceptual Analysis.Roland Bluhm - 2013 - In Migue Hoeltje, Thomas Spitzley & Wolfgang Spohn (eds.), Was dürfen wir glauben? Was sollen wir tun? Sektionsbeiträge des achten internationalen Kongresses der Gesellschaft für Analytische Philosophie e.V. DuEPublico. pp. 7-15.
    Ordinary Language Philosophy has largely fallen out of favour, and with it the belief in the primary importance of analyses of ordinary language for philosophical purposes. Still, in their various endeavours, philosophers not only from analytic but also from other backgrounds refer to the use and meaning of terms of interest in ordinary parlance. In doing so, they most commonly appeal to their own linguistic intuitions. Often, the appeal to individual intuitions is supplemented by reference to dictionaries. In recent times, (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Two Problems with the Socio-Relational Critique of Distributive Egalitarianism.Christian Seidel - 2013 - In Miguel Hoeltje, Thomas Spitzley & Wolfgang Spohn (eds.), Was dürfen wir glauben? Was sollen wir tun? Sektionsbeiträge des achten internationalen Kongresses der Gesellschaft für Analytische Philosophie e.V. Duisburg-Essen: DuEPublico. pp. 525-535.
    Distributive egalitarians believe that distributive justice is to be explained by the idea of distributive equality (DE) and that DE is of intrinsic value. The socio-relational critique argues that distributive egalitarianism does not account for the “true” value of equality, which rather lies in the idea of “equality as a substantive social value” (ESV). This paper examines the socio-relational critique and argues that it fails because – contrary to what the critique presupposes –, first, ESV is not conceptually distinct from (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark