12 found
Sort by:
See also:
Profile: Lawrence Masek (Ohio Dominican University)
  1. Lawrence Masek (2011). The Contralife Argument and the Principle of Double Effect. National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 11 (1):83-97.
  2. Lawrence Masek (2010). Intentions, Motives and the Doctrine of Double Effect. Philosophical Quarterly 60 (240):567-585.
    I defend the doctrine of double effect and a so-called ‘strict’ definition of intention: A intends an effect if and only if A has it as an end or believes that it is a state of affairs in the causal sequence that will result in A's end. Following Kamm's proposed ‘doctrine of triple effect’, I distinguish an intended effect from an effect that motivates an action, and show that this distinction is morally significant. I use several contrived cases as illustrations, (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Lawrence Masek (2010). On Some Proposals for Producing Human Stem Cells. National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 10 (2):257-264.
  4. Lawrence Masek (2008). Improving the Analogies in Contralife Arguments. Heythrop Journal 49 (3):442-452.
  5. Lawrence Masek (2008). Treating Humanity as an Inviolable End. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 33 (1):1-16.
    I argue that contraception is morally wrong but that periodic abstinence (or natural family planning) is not. Further, I argue that altered nuclear transfer—a proposed technique for creating human stem cells without destroying human embryos—is morally wrong for the same reason that contraception is. Contrary to what readers might expect, my argument assumes nothing about the morality of cloning or abortion and requires no premises about God or natural teleology. Instead, I argue that contraception and altered nuclear transfer are morally (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Lawrence Masek (2006). A Contralife Argument Against Altered Nuclear Transfer. National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 6 (2):235-240.
  7. Lawrence Masek (2006). Deadly Drugs and the Doctrine of Double Effect: A Reply to Tully. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 68 (2):143-151.
    In a recent contribution to this journal, Patrick Tully criticizes my view that the doctrine of double effect does not prohibit a pharmaceutical company from selling a drug that has potentially fatal side-effects and that does not treat a life-threatening condition. Tully alleges my account is too permissive and makes the doctrine irrelevant to decisions about selling harmful products. In the following paper, I respond to Tully’s objections and show that he misinterprets my position and misstates some elements of the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Lawrence Masek (2005). How Kant's View of Perfect and Imperfect Duties Resolves an Alleged Moral Dilemma for Judges. Ratio Juris 18 (4):415-428.
    I clarify Kant's classification of duties and criticize the apocryphal tradition that, according to Kant, perfect duties trump imperfect duties. I then use Kant's view to argue that judges who believe that an action is immoral and should be illegal need not set aside their beliefs in order to comply with binding precedents that permit the action. The same view of morality that causes some people to oppose certain actions, including abortion, requires lower–court judges to comply with binding precedents. Therefore, (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Lawrence Masek (2002). All's Not Fair in War: How Kant's Just War Theory Refutes War Realism. Public Affairs Quarterly 16 (2):143-154.
  10. Lawrence Masek (2002). Why Kant's Project Did Not Have To Fail. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 76 (Suppl.):253-264.
    This paper argues that Kant identifies what is morally good as what allows people to fulfill their essential purpose. In After Virtue, Alasdair MacIntyre contends that the Enlightenment project of justifying morality had to fail because Enlightenment thinkers did not treat moral judgments as teleological judgments. However, Kant claims in his Critique of Judgment that judging something to be good always refers to a purpose. I reconcile this claim with some passages from Kant’s writings that seem to contradict it, including (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Lawrence Masek (2000). Petitionary Prayer to an Omnipotent and Omnibenevolent God. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 74 (Suppl.):273-283.
  12. Lawrence Masek (2000). The Doctrine of Double Effect, Deadly Drugs, and Business Ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly 10 (2):483-495.
    Manuel Velasquez and F. Neil Brady apply the doctrine of double effect to business ethics and conclude that the doctrine allows a pharmaceutical company to sell a drug with potentially fatal side effects only if it also has the good effect of saving lives. This forbidsthe sale of many common products, such as automobiles and alcohol. My account preserves the virtues of the doctrine of double effectwithout making it too restrictive. I apply the doctrine to a pharmaceutical company’s decision to (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation