Journal of Applied Philosophy 39 (1):6-22 (2020)

Authors
James Christensen
University of Essex
Abstract
According to an argument commonly made by politicians, selling weapons to oppressive and aggressive regimes can sometimes be permissible because the sale renders the victims of these regimes no worse off than they would have been had the sale not been made. We can refer to this argument as the inconsequence argument. My primary aim in this article is to identify one reason why the inconsequence argument will often not succeed in vindicating arms sales to oppressive and aggressive regimes. The inconsequence argument will often not succeed because arms sales to oppressive and aggressive regimes often do make the victims of these regimes worse off than they would have been had the sales not gone ahead. The victims of these regimes are often made worse off in virtue of the fact that arms sales can generate expressed harms, which, unlike some of the material harms often engendered by such sales, are additive (rather than substitutive) in character. As I shall explain, expressed harms are similar to, but also significantly different from, expressive harms. The differences are important because they allow us to construct a reply that can answer the inconsequence argument on its own (consequentialist) terms.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2020, 2022
DOI 10.1111/japp.12477
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
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

Do I Make a Difference?Shelly Kagan - 2011 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 39 (2):105-141.
Motive Utilitarianism.Robert Merrihew Adams - 1976 - Journal of Philosophy 73 (14):467-481.
It Makes No Difference Whether or Not I Do It.Jonathan Glover & M. J. Scott-Taggart - 1975 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes 49:171-209.
Moral Skepticism and International Relations.Marshall Cohen - 1985 - In Lawrence A. Alexander (ed.), International Ethics: A Philosophy and Public Affairs Reader. Princeton University Press. pp. 3-50.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Political Economy of Arms Export Restrictions: The Case of Japan.Atsushi Tago & Gerald Schneider - 2012 - Japanese Journal of Political Science 13 (3):419-439.
Understanding Harm and its Moral Significance.Matthew Hanser - 2019 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 22 (4):853-870.
A War of One's Own: Mercenaries and the Theme of Arma Aliena in Machiavelli's Il Principe.Séan Erwin - 2010 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 18 (4):541-574.
The Semantics of Political Symbols.Andrei Babaitsev - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 44:5-9.
Ethical Issues in Arms Technology.Nwoye Leonard - 2018 - GNOSI: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Human Theory and Praxis 1 (1):24-32.
The Moral Status of Enabling Harm.Samuel C. Rickless - 2011 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 92 (1):66-86.
Toward a Philosophy of Harm Reduction.Shannon Dea - 2020 - Health Care Analysis 28 (4):302-313.
Nurture Before Responsibility: Self-in-Relation Competence and Self-Harm.Camillia Kong - 2019 - Philosophy, Psychiatry, and Psychology 26 (1):1-18.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2020-11-18

Total views
74 ( #157,670 of 2,519,871 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
65 ( #12,069 of 2,519,871 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes