David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Moral Philosophy 8 (2):197-222 (2011)
Beneficence is usually regarded as adequate when it results in an actual benefit for a beneficiary and satisfies her self-chosen end. However, beneficence that satisfies these conditions can harm beneficiaries' free agency, particularly when they are robustly dependent on benefactors. First, the means that benefactors choose can have undesirable side-effects on resources that beneficiaries need for future free action. Second, benefactors may undermine beneficiaries' ability to freely deliberate and choose. It is therefore insufficient to satisfy someone's self-chosen ends. Instead, good beneficence depends on whether the benefactor avoids undue influence over a beneficiary's deliberation and whether the choice of means is compatible with the beneficiary's conception of her good. Consequently, benefactors must have substantial respect for a beneficiary's free agency and the practical competence to choose means that take into account the beneficiary's conception of her good and the wider set of circumstances that influence her life
|Keywords||DEPENDENCE BENEFICENCE AGENCY AUTONOMY BENEVOLENCE PHILANTHROPY|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Melissa Seymour Fahmy (2011). Love, Respect, and Interfering with Others. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 92 (2):174-192.
Edmund D. Pellegrino (1988). For the Patient's Good: The Restoration of Beneficence in Health Care. Oxford University Press.
Karen Stohr (2011). Kantian Beneficence and the Problem of Obligatory Aid. Journal of Moral Philosophy 8 (1):45-67.
Diego S. Silva (2010). Dignity Promotion and Beneficence. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 7 (4):365-372.
Nora Jacobson & Diego Silva (2010). Dignity Promotion and Beneficence. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 7 (4):365-372.
Paul Lansing & Neal P. Goldman (1996). The Frequent-Flier Dilemna: Should the Employer or the Employee Be the Beneficiary of These Programs? [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 15 (6):661 - 670.
Dale Dorsey (2009). Aggregation, Partiality, and the Strong Beneficence Principle. Philosophical Studies 146 (1):139 - 157.
Leonard M. Fleck (1989). Just Health Care (I): Is Beneficence Enough? Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 10 (2).
Jakob Elster (2011). Procreative Beneficence – Cui Bono? Bioethics 25 (9):482-488.
Rebecca Bennett (2009). The Fallacy of the Principle of Procreative Beneficence. Bioethics 23 (5):265-273.
Melissa Stobie & Catherine Slack (2010). Treatment Needs in Hiv Prevention Trials: Using Beneficence to Clarify Sponsor-Investigator Responsibilities. Developing World Bioethics 10 (3):150-157.
Thaddeus Metz (2010). For the Sake of the Friendship: Relationality and Relationship as Grounds of Beneficence. Theoria 57 (4):54-76.
Andrew Eshleman (1997). Alternative Possibilities and the Free Will Defence. Religious Studies 33 (3):267-286.
Added to index2011-04-07
Total downloads10 ( #120,359 of 1,088,400 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #69,601 of 1,088,400 )
How can I increase my downloads?