Business Ethics Quarterly 15 (2):205-236 (2005)
This paper revisits the Pinto case not merely for the purpose of demythologizing the case, but as an opportunity to examine the broader issue of the logic of blame, the ascription of legal and moral responsibility. Three issues are addressed in the contexts of fault and liability in tort, criminal liability and product liability: 1) To what extent can judgments of moral wrongdoing or blame be inferred from legal judgments? 2) What are the strengths and weaknesses of attempting to model moral arguments upon legal ones? and, 3) What is the nature and role of judgments of risk evaluation in legal and moral judgments?
|Keywords||Applied Philosophy Business and Professional Ethics Social Science|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Putting the Age of Criminal and Civil Liability Into Context: A Dialogue Between Law with Psychology.Nuno Ferreira - unknown
The Basis of Moral Liability to Defensive Killing.Jeff McMahan - 2005 - Philosophical Issues 15 (1):386–405.
Intentionality, Morality, and Their Relationship in Human Judgment.Bertram F. Malle - 2006 - Journal of Cognition and Culture 6:61-86.
A Critique of Social Products Liability.Gordon G. Sollars - 2003 - Business Ethics Quarterly 13 (3):381-390.
The Explanatory Component of Moral Responsibility.Gunnar Björnsson & Karl Persson - 2012 - Noûs 46 (2):326-354.
Intentionality and Moral Judgments in Commonsense Thought About Action.Steven Sverdlik - 2004 - Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology 24 (2):224-236.
Added to index2011-01-09
Total downloads24 ( #211,672 of 2,172,029 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #325,967 of 2,172,029 )
How can I increase my downloads?