Authors
Tom Parr
University of Essex
Abstract
Imposing pure risks—risks that do not materialise into harm—is sometimes wrong. The Harm Account explains this wrongness by claiming that pure risks are harms. By contrast, The Autonomy Account claims that pure risks impede autonomy. We develop two objections to these influential accounts. The Separation Objection proceeds from the observation that, if it is wrong to v then it is sometimes wrong to risk v‐ing. The intuitive plausibility of this claim does not depend on any account of the facts that ground moral wrongness. This suggests a close relationship between the factors that make an act wrong and the factors that make risking that act wrong, which both accounts fail to recognise. The Determinism Objection holds that both accounts fail to explain the wrongness of pure risks in a deterministic world. We then develop an alternative—The Buck‐Passing Account—that withstands both objections.
Keywords John Oberdiek  autonomy  harm  intentions  pure risks
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1002/tht3.407
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 70,008
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

What We Owe to Each Other.Thomas Scanlon - 1998 - Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Reasons and Persons.Joseph Margolis - 1986 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 47 (2):311-327.
What We Owe to Each Other.Thomas Scanlon - 2002 - Mind 111 (442):323-354.
The Morality of Freedom.Joseph Raz - 1986 - Philosophy 63 (243):119-122.

View all 14 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Can a Risk of Harm Itself Be a Harm?Thomas Rowe - 2022 - Analysis 81 (4):694-701.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

When the Risk of Harm Harms.Adriana Placani - 2017 - Law and Philosophy 36 (1):77-100.
The Moral Significance of Risking.John Oberdiek - 2012 - Legal Theory 18 (3):339-356.
Rights, Explanation, and Risks.David McCarthy - 1997 - Ethics 107 (2):205-225.
Morality and Risk.David Patrick Mccarthy - 1995 - Dissertation, University of Southern California
Privacy and Perfect Voyeurism.Tony Doyle - 2009 - Ethics and Information Technology 11 (3):181-189.
Lies, Harm, And Practical Interests.Andreas Stokke - 2019 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 98 (2):329-345.
Limits on Risks for Healthy Volunteers in Biomedical Research.David B. Resnik - 2012 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 33 (2):137-149.
Obstetric Autonomy and Informed Consent.Jessica Flanigan - 2016 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 19 (1):225-244.
Luck, Justice and Systemic Financial Risk.John Linarelli - 2017 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 34 (3):331-352.
Risk and Value.John T. Sanders - 1996 - A.S.V.I. News 1996 (Spring):4-5.
The Right Not to Know: An Autonomy Based Approach.R. Andorno - 2004 - Journal of Medical Ethics 30 (5):435-439.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2019-02-08

Total views
36 ( #315,679 of 2,505,154 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
11 ( #68,456 of 2,505,154 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes