David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Studies 114 (1-2):81 - 106 (2003)
Throw: Harry throws a stone at Dick, hitting him. Intuitively, there is a moral difference between the first and the second case of each of these pairs.1 In the second case, the agent’s behavior is morally worse than his behavior in the first case. But in each pair, the agent’s behavior has the same outcome: in No Check and Shoot, the outcome is that a child dies, and Jim saves $40; in No Catch and Throw, the outcome is that Dick is hit by a stone. Let us call these pairs of cases “the paradigm pairs.” The paradigm pairs, and others like them, provide evidence that common sense morality is not consequentialist: common sense morality does not judge the moral worth of actions just in terms of their consequences. But it has proved extremely difficult to provide an account of a morally relevant difference between the members of pairs like the ones above. One hypothesis about the difference that has received a lot of attention in the literature is that in the first kind of case the agent allows the outcome to occur, while in the second the agent makes the..
|Keywords||Philosophy Philosophy Epistemology Logic Philosophy of Mind Philosophy of Religion|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Fiona Woollard (2012). The Doctrine of Doing and Allowing I: Analysis of the Doing/Allowing Distinction. Philosophy Compass 7 (7):448-458.
Fiona Woollard (2012). The Doctrine of Doing and Allowing II: The Moral Relevance of the Doing/Allowing Distinction. Philosophy Compass 7 (7):459-469.
Similar books and articles
Fiery Cushman, Joshua Knobe & Walter Sinnott-Armstrong (2008). Moral Appraisals Affect Doing/Allowing Judgments. Cognition 108 (2):353-380.
Anthony F. Beavers, Between Angels and Animals: The Question of Robot Ethics, or is Kantian Moral Agency Desirable?
Peter Boltuc (2007). Why Common Sense Morality is Not Collectively Self-Defeating. Polish Journal of Philosophy 1 (2):17-26.
Peter Vallentyne (2011). Responsibility and False Beliefs. In Carl Knight & Zofia Stemploska (eds.), Justice and Responsibility. Oxford University Press
Thomas Talbott (2009). God, Freedom, and Human Agency. Faith and Philosophy 26 (4):378-397.
Fiona Woollard (2010). Doing/Allowing and the Deliberative Requirement. Ratio 23 (2):199-216.
Mark van Roojen (1999). Reflective Moral Equilibrium and Psychological Theory. Ethics 109 (4):846-857.
Fiona Woollard (2008). Doing and Allowing, Threats and Sequences. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 89 (2):261–277.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads51 ( #65,640 of 1,724,888 )
Recent downloads (6 months)8 ( #81,171 of 1,724,888 )
How can I increase my downloads?