Yet many in the USA and Europe are not familiar with his important work; this book seeks to rectify that gap.In Globalization, Ethics and Islam, Jewish, ...

The doctrine (or principle) of double effect is often invoked to explain the permissibility of an action that causes a serious harm, such as the death of a human being, as a side effect of promoting some good end. According to the principle of double effect, sometimes it is permissible to cause a harm as a side effect (or “double effect”) of bringing about a good result even though it would not be permissible to cause such a harm as a (...) means to bringing about the same good end. Does the principle of double effect play the important explanatory role that has been claimed for it? To consider this question, one must be careful to clarify just what the principle is supposed to explain. Three misinterpretations of the principle’s force or range of application are common. 1. To ensure that Double Effect is not misunderstood as principle issuing a blanket permission on causing any unintended harm that yields a benefit, applications must require that the agent seek to minimize the harm involved. 2. Since it is widely accepted that it is wrong to aim to produce harm to someone as an end, to rule this out is not part of double effect’s distinctive content. 3. Harms that were produced regretfully and only for the sake of producing a good end may be prohibited by double effect because they were brought about as part of the agent’s means to realizing the good end. (shrink)

In The Doctrine of God Dolf te Velde examines the interaction of method and content in three historically important accounts of the doctrine of God.

Les Doctrines littéraires de l'Encyclopédie, ou le Romantisme des encyclopédistes / par J. Rocafort,... Date de l'édition originale: 1890 Le présent ouvrage s'inscrit dans une politique de conservation patrimoniale des ouvrages de la littérature Française mise en place avec la BNF. HACHETTE LIVRE et la BNF proposent ainsi un catalogue de titres indisponibles, la BNF ayant numérisé ces oeuvres et HACHETTE LIVRE les imprimant à la demande. Certains de ces ouvrages reflètent des courants de pensée caractéristiques de leur époque, (...) mais qui seraient aujourd'hui jugés condamnables. Ils n'en appartiennent pas moins à l'histoire des idées en France et sont susceptibles de présenter un intérêt scientifique ou historique. Le sens de notre démarche éditoriale consiste ainsi à permettre l'accès à ces oeuvres sans pour autant que nous en cautionnions en aucune façon le contenu. Pour plus d'informations, rendez-vous sur www.hachettebnf.fr. (shrink)

Les religions sont-elles condamnées à s'opposer et à être source de conflits en raison de la diversité et du caractère souvent contradictoire de leurs doctrines? Lorsqu'elles sont missionnaires et prétendent détenir la vérité sur Dieu, le monde et l'homme, le caractère systématique de leurs énoncés théologiques et juridiques qui excluent les autres systèmes ne redouble-t-il pas ces conflits? Comment dans ces conditions le dialogue interreligieux pourrait-il aller au-delà des rencontres et du dialogue de vie? Peut-on penser du point de (...) vue théologique une ouverture à l'autre qui assoie l'unité entre les religions, leur communion et leur réconciliation au niveau de la doctrine sans obliger chacune à renoncer aux énoncés de sa foi?0Pour envisager ces questions fondamentales qui concernent tous les acteurs impliqués dans le dialogue interreligieux ou la théologie du pluralisme religieux, plusieurs théologiens ont interrogé George Lindbeck afin d'évaluer si les principes qu'il avance pour repenser l'oecuménisme sont transposables au niveau de l'interreligieux. En effet, conscient de l'enjeu des différences doctrinales entre les Églises chrétiennes, Lindbeck a questionné la nature d'une doctrine et a proposé un modèle post-libéral privilégiant la praxis, l'articulation entre l'action et le langage, la réactivation et la réadaptation constante des identités. Ces recherches montrent qu'en dépit de bien des limites de son modèle, on trouve chez le théologien luthérien une approche originale et féconde pour répondre à bien des défis contemporains. (shrink)

In recent years, the doctrine of God has once again become a central focus of theological discussion and debate. Internationally respected scholar Veli-Matti Kärkkäinen offers a global survey of understandings of God in Scripture, Christian history, and contemporary theology. This new edition incorporates developments in theological research over the past decade and has been substantially updated throughout.

Philon d'Alexandrie, un philosophe juif contemporain de Jésus et de saint Paul et le principal témoin de la théologie de la Diaspora, éclaire les multiples visages de sa foi religieuse à l'aide de la philosophie grecque, au cours de ses abondants commentaires sur la Loi de Moïse. Il est très proche du monde de pensée de saint Paul, de l'Épître aux Hébreux et de saint Jean, c'est-à-dire du milieu où s'est développé le christianisme. L'auteur, Jean Laporte, élève de l'Institut catholique (...) de Paris et professeur à l'université Notre-Dame d'Indiana (USA), s'est fixé pour but d'étudier la doctrine eucharistique de Philon sous ses différents aspects : les termes et images qui l'expriment, son lien intime avec le culte du temple, les problèmes cosmologiques, anthropologiques et spirituels liés à l'œuvre de la création et de la restauration de l'homme. Le travail révèle la richesse de l'Eucharistie philonienne et contribue indirectement à éclairer les bases de l'Eucharistie chrétienne. (shrink)

L'ouvrage Quelles doctrines constitutionnelles pour quel(s) droit(s) constitutionel(s) réuni les contributions des plus éminents spécialistes du droit constitutionnel français, mais aussi étrangers, dans le but de dresser un état des lieux scientifiques de cette discipline : qu'est-ce le droit constitutionnel aujourd'hui? Quellle est son utilité? Et quelles sont ses méthodes, ses évolutuons? Les différentes contributions ici proposées se penchent sur la possible formalisation (ou pas) d'une discipline scientifique autour d'une ou différentes écoles, ainsi que les évolutions qui travaillent les (...) objets, ou encore les domaines politiques et juridiques, mais aussi économiques, sociaux et culturels qu'il se propose d'appréhender. Cet ouvrage se révèle donc un outil précieux pour tous les juristes, mais plus largement, pour tous les citoyens qui s'intéressent aux questions de l'organisation constitutionnelle du Pouvoir au sein des Etats modernes. (shrink)

Introducing the doctrine of God -- Does God change? Does God have emotions? -- Does God have a future? -- Does God know everything? Does God know the future? -- Can God do anything? -- Is God entirely good? -- How can God be one and three? -- Concluding reflections.

It is well known that in India, over the last two thousand five hundred years or more, there has been a pervasive belief in the doctrine of Karma. Various forms and variants in which this doctrine has found expression in the multifarious texts and metaphysical systems have drawn a good deal of attention. The present paper, however, is an attempt at analysing the function of this doctrine, in the sustenance of the traditional social system, and particularly the scheme of social (...) stratification. As we shall see, an unshakable faith in this doctrine by people belonging to all strata of society provided tremendous strength to the caste hierarchy based on birth, and ensured a secure place for the Brāhmanas and their progeny on the top of the social pyramid. (shrink)

On-line English translation of these 40 short statements of doctrine, mostly concerning ethics.

Judgment aggregation theory, or rather, as we conceive of it here, logical aggregation theory generalizes social choice theory by having the aggregation rule bear on judgments of all kinds instead of merely preference judgments. It derives from Kornhauser and Sager’s doctrinal paradox and List and Pettit’s discursive dilemma, two problems that we distinguish emphatically here. The current theory has developed from the discursive dilemma, rather than the doctrinal paradox, and the final objective of the paper is to give the latter (...) its own theoretical development along the line of recent work by Dietrich and Mongin. However, the paper also aims at reviewing logical aggregation theory as such, and it covers impossibility theorems by Dietrich, Dietrich and List, Dokow and Holzman, List and Pettit, Mongin, Nehring and Puppe, Pauly and van Hees, providing a uniform logical framework in which they can be compared with each other. The review goes through three historical stages: the initial paradox and dilemma, the scattered early results on the independence axiom, and the so-called canonical theorem, a collective achievement that provided the theory with its specific method of analysis. The paper goes some way towards philosophical logic, first by briefly connecting the aggregative framework of judgment with the modern philosophy of judgment, and second by thoroughly discussing and axiomatizing the ‘general logic’ built in this framework. (shrink)

La tension entre le non-dualisme et le dualisme domine toute l’histoire du Vedanta. En face de l’advaita de Śaṅkara, le système de Madhva, auquel cette étude est consacrée, représente l’extrême dualisme, dvaita. Cependant Madhva, après avoir posé la réalité irréductible de la différence entre Dieu et le monde, a comme compensé cette scission de l’être par l’affirmation que tout être autre que l’Être absolu est dépendant de celui-ci, seul Dieu ne dépendant que de lui-même. L’originalité du système de Madhva est (...) d’inventer une relation nouvelle entre l’Être et les êtres. Seul l’Être est capable de faire exister des êtres différents de lui et totalement dépendants de lui ; Dieu permet à toute réalité d’être, et d’être ce qu’elle est. (shrink)

This book provides an accessible and thorough analysis of "The Doctrine of Being," the first part of Hegel's Science of Logic. Though it received much scholarly attention in the past, interpreters of this text have generally refrained from examining it in a sufficiently detailed manner. Through a rigorous and critical reading of Hegel's speculative arguments, Mehmet Tabak illustrates that Hegel meant his logic to be both a presuppositionless analysis and development of the basic categories of thought, on the one hand, (...) and a post-Kantian ontology on the other. However, the analysis of the text demonstrates that Hegel fails to deliver such logic. This volume promises to be an indispensable guide to those who wish to understand the first book of Science of Logic. (shrink)

The Doctrine of Double Effect (DDE) is an influential non-consequentialist principle positing a role for intention in affecting the moral permissibility of some actions. In particular, the DDE focuses on the intend/foresee distinction, the core claim being that it is sometimes permissible to bring about as a foreseen but unintended side-effect of one’s action some harm it would have been impermissible to aim at as a means or as an end, all else being equal. This article explores the meaning and (...) application of the DDE along with current debates over the nature of the intend/foresee distinction and its moral significance. How is the line between intended effects and merely foreseen but unintended side-effects to be drawn, and how are problem cases best handled? What is an appropriate methodology for debating the tenability of the DDE? How might the DDE interact with other non-consequentialist principles, and how might it be modified to capture other related factors (resulting perhaps in a Doctrine of Triple Effect) or to avoid certain problem cases? Does the DDE make permissibility turn on the actual intentions of particular agents, as critics such as Thomson and Scanlon assume, or is the role of intention more abstract? (shrink)

This article proposes an analysis of the doctrine of sufficiency. According to my reading, the doctrine's basic positive claim is ‘prioritarian’: benefiting x is of special moral importance where (and only where) x is badly off. Its negative claim is anti-egalitarian: most comparative facts expressed by statements of the type ‘x is worse off than y’ have no moral significance at all. This contradicts the ‘classical’ priority view according to which, although equality per se does not matter, whenever x is (...) worse off than y, at least some priority should be assigned to helping x. Section I elaborates and defends this reconstruction of the doctrine of sufficiency, and section II shows that the privileged utility level presumed within the sufficiency framework exists. (shrink)

The standard version of the doctrine of double effect, a significant doctrine in applied ethics particularly medical ethics, not only fails to capture some morally significant components of Aquinas’ view, but it does not resort to proper complementary features in order to accommodate the doctrine to our moral intuitions. We attempt to offer a new formulation of the doctrine incorporating the main components of Aquinas’ view and also to extend the view using some complementary features. We will examine the strength (...) of the formulation applying it into some ethically controversial situations, mainly in medical ethics. (shrink)

The doctrine of double effect has a firm, respected position within Roman Catholic medical ethics. Neil M. Gorsuch, a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, believes that this doctrine also enjoys a central place within U.S. law. This essay examines and assesses Gorsuch’s thesis. National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 11.1 (Spring 2011): 31–40.

:Justice can be approached from many angles in ethical and political debates, including those involving healthcare, biomedical research, and well-being. The main doctrines of justice are liberal egalitarianism, libertarianism, luck egalitarianism, socialism, utilitarianism, capability approach, communitarianism, and care ethics. These can be further elaborated in the light of traditional moral and social theories, values, ideals, and interests, and there are distinct dimensions of justice that are captured better by some tactics than by others. In this article, questions surrounding these (...) matters are approached with the hermeneutic idea of a distinction between “American” and “European” ways of thinking. (shrink)

. How does the doctrine of double effect apply to business decisions to sell products which may be harmful to consumers? Lawrence Masek believes that some authors have misapplied the doctrine to this type of decision and, as a consequence, have committed themselves to placing unwarranted constraints on businesses. Seeking to correct this mistake, Masek presents his account of how the doctrine applies here, an account which is rather permissive but which, he claims, nevertheless preserves the virtues of the doctrine. (...) It will be seen, though, that his attempt to loosen these putatively unnecessary constraints by appealing to consumer autonomy and an intuition about the morality of producing harmful products leaves the doctrine of double effect irrelevant to this type of decision. His argument that the doctrine is less restrictive in this context than others suppose leads ultimately to the conclusion that the doctrine does not constrain this kind of business decision at all. (shrink)

Unlike some other reproductions of classic texts (1) We have not used OCR(Optical Character Recognition), as this leads to bad quality books with introduced typos. (2) In books where there are images such as portraits, maps, sketches etc We have endeavoured to keep the quality of these images, so they represent accurately the original artefact. Although occasionally there may be certain imperfections with these old texts, we feel they deserve to be made available for future generations to enjoy.

According to the Doctrine of Doing and Allowing, the distinction between doing and allowing harm is morally significant. Doing harm is harder to justify than merely allowing harm. This paper is the first of a two paper critical overview of the literature on the Doctrine of Doing and Allowing. In this paper, I consider the analysis of the distinction between doing and allowing harm. I explore some of the most prominent attempts to analyse this distinction:. Philippa Foot’s sequence account, Warren (...) Quinn’s action/ inaction account, and counterfactual test accounts put forward by Shelly Kagan and Jonathan Bennett. I also discuss Jeff McMahan’s account of the removal of barriers to harm. I argue that analysis of the distinction has often been made more difficult by two mistaken assumption: (1) the assumption that when an agent does or allows harm his behaviour makes the difference to whether or not the harm occurs (2) the assumption that the distinction between doing and allowing and the distinction between action and inaction are interchangeable. I suggest that Foot’s account is the most promising account of the doing/allowing distinction, but that it requires further development. (shrink)

This article discusses two doctrines of jus ex bello concerning whether and how to end wars. In Section I, I defend the claim that there is a distinct morality of ending wars. Section II rebuts a challenge that the account is too permissive of war. Section III rejects a forward-looking conception of proportionality for jus ex bello. In Section IV, I allow an exception in cases in which the just cause for the war has changed. In Section V, I (...) defend five principles governing how to end a war. (shrink)

When the U.S. conducts warfare, elements of a force are drawn from different services and work together as a single team to accomplish an assigned mission. To achieve such unified action, it is necessary that the doctrines governing the actions of members of specific services be both consistent with and subservient to joint Doctrine. Because warfighting today increasingly involves not only live forces but also automated systems, unified action requires that information technology that is used in joint warfare must (...) be aligned with joint doctrine. It requires also that the separate information systems used by the different elements of a joint force must be interoperable, in the sense that data and information that is generated by each element must be usable (understandable, processable) by all the other elements that need them. Currently, such interoperability is impeded by multiple inconsistencies among the different data and software standards used by warfighters. We describe here the on-going project of creating a Joint Doctrine Ontology (JDO), which uses joint doctrine to provide shared computer-accessible content valid for any field of military endeavor, organization, and information system. JDO addresses the two previously mentioned requirements of unified action by providing a widely applicable benchmark for use by developers of information systems that will both guarantee alignment with joint doctrine and support interoperability. (shrink)

Comment penser le logique? Le propre de Brentano, dont se réclament la phénoménologie comme l'École de Vienne, ce n'est pas d'abord d'avoir réformé la syllogistique d'Aristote, mais — à chacune des étapes de sa doctrine — de reconduire la proposition logique au jugement, c'est-à-dire à la subjectivité, sans qu'il soit pour autant évident qu'il succombe au « psychologisme ». Il n'en viendra ainsi à défendre une théorie non-prédicative puis non-propositionnelle du jugement. Wie soll des Logische gedacht werden? Was Brentano, worauf (...) sich die Phänomenologie wie auch die Wienerschule beruft, auszeichnet, ist nicht in erster Linie die Reform der aristotelischen Syllogistik, sondern die Rückführung — auf jedem Schritt seiner Lehre — des logischen Satzes zum Urteil, d.h. zur Subjektivität, ohne sich deshalb offensichtlich dem « Psychologismus » zu unterwerfen. So gelangt er zu einer Urteilslehre, die zunächst die prädikative Relation und dann selbst die Idee einer Relation zwischen dem Urteilenden und einem Objeckt zurückweist. (shrink)

This essay explores doctrinal issues in the philosophical and theological debates on human nature and self-love in the early 18th century. It focuses on the arguments between the Scottish philosopher and theologian Archibald Campbell and the Committee for Purity of Doctrine concerning Campbell’s Enquiry into the Original of Moral Virtue (1733). These centre in particular on Campbell’s supposedly unorthodox account of self-love as a virtuous principle and the connected more general view of human nature as tending towards virtue. A comparison (...) with the situation in Geneva shows that similar views were held by influential theologians such as Jean-Alphonse Turrettini and Jacob Vernet. (shrink)