David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Military Ethics 10 (2):81-93 (2011)
Utilitarianism is the strand of moral philosophy that holds that judgment of whether an act is morally right or wrong, hence whether it ought to be done or not, is primarily based upon the foreseen consequences of the act in question. It has a bad reputation in military ethics because it would supposedly make military expedience override all other concerns. Given that the utilitarian credo of the greatest happiness for the greatest number is in fact agent-neutral, meaning that the consequences to everyone should weigh equally, this critique of utilitarianism is not entirely fair. By focusing on some anomalies in both the principle of double effect and in our tendency to give priority to the interests of those who are near and dear to us, this article argues that there is something to be said for a military ethic that attaches less weight to intentions, and more to the consequences.
|Keywords||double effect intention Just War Tradition obligation utilitarianism|
|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
Thomas Scanlon (2008). Moral Dimensions: Permissibility, Meaning, Blame. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Derek Parfit (1984). Reasons and Persons. Oxford University Press.
Thomas Nagel (1986). The View From Nowhere. Oxford University Press.
Thomas Scanlon (1998). What We Owe to Each Other. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
David Hume (1739/2000). A Treatise of Human Nature. Oxford University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Alison Hills (2007). Intentions, Foreseen Consequences and the Doctrine of Double Effect. Philosophical Studies 133 (2):257 - 283.
Stefano Predelli (2004). Bombers: Some Comments on Double Effect and Harmful Involvement. Journal of Military Ethics 3 (1):16-26.
T. A. Cavanaugh (2006). Double-Effect Reasoning: Doing Good and Avoiding Evil. Oxford University Press.
Steven Lee (2004). Double Effect, Double Intention, and Asymmetric Warfare. Journal of Military Ethics 3 (3):233-251.
Jakob Elster (2012). Scanlon on Permissibility and Double Effect. Journal of Moral Philosophy 9 (1):75-102.
Claire Thomas (2005). Civilian Starvation: A Just Tactic of War? Journal of Military Ethics 4 (2):108-118.
Stuart A. Cohen (2005). 'Unlicensed' War in Jewish Tradition: Sources, Consequences and Implications. Journal of Military Ethics 4 (3):198-213.
Darrell Cole (2011). War and Intention. Journal of Military Ethics 10 (3):174-191.
Iii Get Checked Abstract Thomas J. Bole (1991). The Theoretical Tenability of the Doctrine of Double Effect. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (5).
Peter Olsthoorn (2009). A Critique of Integrity: Has a Commander a Moral Obligation to Uphold His Own Principles? Journal of Military Ethics 8 (2):90-104.
Ralph Wedgwood (2011). Scanlon on Double Effect. [REVIEW] Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 83 (2):464-472.
Joseph Boyle (1991). Who is Entitled to Double Effect? Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (5):475-494.
Anne Schwenkenbecher (2014). Collateral Damage and the Principle of Due Care. Journal of Military Ethics 13 (1):94-105.
Added to index2011-07-21
Total downloads564 ( #1,452 of 1,793,258 )
Recent downloads (6 months)26 ( #29,193 of 1,793,258 )
How can I increase my downloads?