One Person's Modus Ponens: Boyle, Absolutist Catholicism, and the Doctrine of Double Effect

Christian Bioethics 3 (2):142-157 (1997)
The doctrine of double effect (DOE) has its origins in Roman Catholic thought and has been held to have widespread applications in bioethics. Its applications range over issues of maternal-fetal conflict, organ donation and transplant, euthanasia, and resource allocation, among other controversial issues. Recently, Joseph Boyle, the foremost proponent of the DOE over the past few decades, has argued that the DOE is required by the absolutist context of the Catholic tradition, and, further, that anyone who rejects this particular context is not entitled to use the doctrine. In this essay, I will focus exclusively on the intention condition of the DOE and its central distinction, i.e., intention/side effect. I will proceed by considering in turn (1) Boyle's argument that the absolutist moral framework of the Catholic tradition requires the intention/side effect distinction; (2) the ways in which that framework is made vulnerable by this requirement; and (3) just why the DOE should be viable even outside of the Catholic tradition if it turns out that a feature of (l) is correct and the challenges of (2) can be met
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1093/cb/3.2.142
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 24,479
External links
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.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Donald B. Marquis (1991). Four Versions of Double Effect. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (5):515-544.
Joseph Boyle (1991). Who is Entitled to Double Effect? Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (5):475-494.
Colin Howson (2009). Sorites is No Threat to Modus Ponens: A Reply to Kochan. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 23 (2):209-212.
John Zeis (2004). Killing Innocents and the Doctrine of Double Effect. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 78:133-144.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

26 ( #184,388 of 1,925,766 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

11 ( #81,914 of 1,925,766 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.