1. double effect
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Suppose that one initiates a causal sequence leading to a basically evil state of affairs, but does not intend the evil effect, and the good effects of the action are proportionate to the bad. A state of affairs is a “basic evil” provided it is evil in virtue of itself and not in virtue of its connection with other states of affairs. The classic form of the Principle of Double Effect (PDE) can be taken to state that then the action that initiated the causal sequence is not wrong on account of the basically evil state of affairs it produces. The action might still be wrong for some other reason, say by violating a promise, or causing some other basically evil state of affairs, or being a..
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|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
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Edward C. Lyons (2005). In Incognito: The Principle of Double Effect in American Constitutional Law. Florida Law Review 57 (3):469-563.
Lawrence Masek (2010). Intentions, Motives and the Doctrine of Double Effect. Philosophical Quarterly 60 (240):567-585.
Ralph Wedgwood (2011). Defending Double Effect. Ratio 24 (4):384-401.
T. A. Cavanaugh (2006). Double-Effect Reasoning: Doing Good and Avoiding Evil. Oxford University Press.
Neil Roughley (2007). The Double Failure of 'Double Effect'. In Christoph Lumer & Sandro Nannini (eds.), Intentionality, Deliberation, and Autonomy. Ashgate.
Thomas Hurka (2006). Value Theory. In David Copp (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Ethical Theory. Oxford University Press. 357--379.
John Harris (2000). The Doctrine of Triple Effect and Why a Rational Agent Need Not Intend the Means to His End, II. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 74 (1):41–57.
Frances M. Kamm (2000). The Doctrine of Triple Effect and Why a Rational Agent Need Not Intend the Means to His End, I. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 74 (1):21–39.
David K. Chan (2000). Intention and Responsibility in Double Effect Cases. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 3 (4):405-434.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads20 ( #86,451 of 1,102,968 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #297,509 of 1,102,968 )
How can I increase my downloads?