Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Recovering the Logic of Double Effect for Business: Intentions, Proportionality, and Impermissible Harms.Rosemarie Monge & Nien-hê Hsieh - 2020 - Business Ethics Quarterly 30 (3):361-387.
    ABSTRACTBusiness actors often act in ways that may harm other parties. While the law aims to restrict harmful behavior and to provide remedies, legal systems do not anticipate all contingencies and legal regulations are not always well-enforced. This article argues that the logic of double effect, which has been developed and deployed in other areas of practical ethics, can be useful in helping business actors decide whether or not to pursue potentially harmful activities in commonplace business activity. The article illustrates (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • A Stronger Doctrine of Double Effect.Ben Bronner & Simon Goldstein - 2018 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 96 (4):793-805.
    Many believe that intended harms are more difficult to justify than are harms that result as a foreseen side effect of one's conduct. We describe cases of harming in which the harm is not intended, yet the harmful act nevertheless runs afoul of the intuitive moral constraint that governs intended harms. We note that these cases provide new and improved counterexamples to the so-called Simple View, according to which intentionally phi-ing requires intending to phi. We then give a new theory (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Secret to the Success of the Doctrine of Double Effect : Biased Framing, Inadequate Methodology, and Clever Distractions.Uwe Steinhoff - 2018 - The Journal of Ethics 22 (3-4):235-263.
    There are different formulations of the doctrine of double effect, and sometimes philosophers propose “revisions” or alternatives, like the means principle, for instance. To demonstrate that such principles are needed in the first place, one would have to compare cases in which all else is equal and show that the difference in intuitions, if any, can only be explained by the one remaining difference and thus by the principle in question. This is not the methodology defenders of the DDE and (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Lethal Organ Donation: Would the Doctor Intend the Donor’s Death?Ben Bronner - 2019 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 44 (4):442-458.
    Lethal organ donation is a hypothetical procedure in which vital organs are removed from living donors, resulting in their death. An important objection to lethal organ donation is that it would infringe the prohibition on doctors intentionally causing the death of patients. I present a series of arguments intended to undermine this objection. In a case of lethal organ donation, the donor’s death is merely foreseen, and not intended.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Bibliography on the Principle of Double Effect.Jörg Schroth - 2011 - Ethik Seite.
    Direct download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Doctrine of Double Effect.Alison McIntyre - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  • Bennett, Intention and the DDE – The Sophisticated Bomber as Pseudo-Problem.Uwe Steinhoff - 2018 - Analysis 78 (1):73-80.
    Arguing against the doctrine of double effect, Bennett claims that the terror bomber only intends to make his victims appear dead. An obvious reply is that he intends to make them appear dead by killing them. I argue that the alleged refutations of this reply rest on a mistaken test question to determine what an agent intends, as Bennett's own test question confirms, and that Bennett is misled by confusing metaphorical death and literal death. Moreover, Bennett's argument is half-hearted anyway, (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Not as a Means: Killing as a Side Effect in Self‐Defense.Kerah Gordon‐Solmon - 2019 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 100 (4):1074-1090.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Negative Effects of Neurointerventions: Confusing Constitution and Causation.Thomas Douglas & Hazem Zohny - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 9 (3):162-164.
    Birks and Buyx (2018) claim that, at least in the foreseeable future, nonconsensual neurointerventions will almost certainly suppress some valuable mental states and will thereby impose an objectionable harm to mental integrity—a harm that it is pro tanto wrong to impose. Of course, incarceration also interferes with valuable mental states, so might seem to be objectionable in the same way. However, Birks and Buyx block this result by maintaining that the negative mental effects of incarceration are merely foreseen, whereas those (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Closeness Problem and the Doctrine of Double Effect: A Way Forward.S. Matthew Liao - 2016 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 10 (4):849-863.
    A major challenge to the Doctrine of Double Effect is the concern that an agent’s intention can be identified in such a fine-grained way as to eliminate an intention to harm from a putative example of an intended harm, and yet, the resulting case appears to be a case of impermissibility. This is the so-called “closeness problem.” Many people believe that one can address the closeness problem by adopting Warren Quinn’s version of the DDE, call it DDE*, which distinguishes between (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The Relevance of Intention to Criminal Wrongdoing.Dana Kay Nelkin & Samuel C. Rickless - 2016 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 10 (4):745-762.
    In this paper, we defend the general thesis that intentions are relevant not only to moral permissibility and impermissibility, but also to criminal wrongdoing, as well as a specific version of the Doctrine of Double Effect that we believe can help solve some challenging puzzles in the criminal law. We begin by answering some recent arguments that marginalize or eliminate the role of intentions as components of criminal wrongdoing [e.g., Alexander and Ferzan, Chiao, Walen ]. We then turn to some (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Wild Goose Chase: Still No Rationales for the Doctrine of Double Effect and Related Principles.Uwe Steinhoff - 2019 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 13 (1):1-25.
    I focus on the question as to what rationale could possibly underlie the doctrine of double effect or related principles. I first briefly review the correct critiques of the claim that people who intend some evil as a means to a good must be “guided by evil,” and that this is allegedly always wrong. I then argue that Quinn’s claim that violations of the DDE express certain negative attitudes of the agent and that agents violating the DDE must make an (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Preventing Optimific Wrongings.Thomas Sinclair - 2017 - Utilitas 29 (4):453-473.
    Most people believe that the rights of others sometimes require us to act in ways that have even substantially sub-optimal outcomes, as viewed from an axiological perspective that ranks outcomes objectively. Bringing about the optimal outcome, contrary to such a requirement, is an ‘optimific wronging’. It is less clear, however, that we are required to prevent optimific wrongings. Perhaps the value of the outcome, combined with the relative weakness of prohibitions on allowing harm as compared to those against doing harm, (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Civilian Immunity Without the Doctrine of Double Effect.Yitzhak Benbaji & Susanne Burri - forthcoming - Utilitas:1-20.
    Civilian Immunity is the legal and moral protection that civilians enjoy against the effects of hostilities under the laws of armed conflict and according to the ethics of killing in war. Immunity specifies different permissibility conditions for directly targeting civilians on the one hand, and for harming civilians incidentally on the other hand. Immunity is standardly defended by appeal to the Doctrine of Double Effect. We show that Immunity's prohibitive stance towards targeting civilians directly, and its more permissive stance towards (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Knowing, Anticipating, Even Facilitating but Still Not Intending: Another Challenge to Double Effect Reasoning.S. Duckett - 2018 - Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 15 (1):33-37.
    A recent administrative law decision in Victoria, Australia, applied double effect reasoning in a novel way. Double effect reasoning has hitherto been used to legitimate treatments which may shorten life but where the intent of treatment is pain relief. The situation reviewed by the Victorian tribunal went further, supporting actions where a doctor agrees to provide pentobarbitone to a patient at some time in the future if the patient feels at that time that his pain is unbearable and he wants (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Punishing Intentions and Neurointerventions.David Birks & Alena Buyx - 2018 - American Journal of Bioethics Neuroscience 9 (3):133-143.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations