Philosophical Studies 133 (2):257 - 283 (2007)
The difficulty of distinguishing between the intended and the merely foreseen consequences of actions seems to many to be the most serious problem for the doctrine of double effect. It has led some to reject the doctrine altogether, and has left some of its defenders recasting it in entirely different terms. I argue that these responses are unnecessary. Using Bratman’s conception of intention, I distinguish the intended consequences of an action from the merely foreseen in a way that can be used to support the doctrine of double effect.
|Keywords||Philosophy Philosophy of Religion Philosophy of Mind Epistemology Logic Philosophy|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
Situationism and Virtue Ethics on the Content of Our Character.Rachana Kamtekar - 2004 - Ethics 114 (3):458-491.
Virtues and Vices.Phillipa Foot - 1997 - In Thomas L. Carson & Paul K. Moser (eds.), Morality and the Good Life. Oup Usa.
Errors About Errors: Virtue Theory and Trait Attribution.Gopal Sreenivasan - 2002 - Mind 111 (441):47-68.
Virtues and Vices.Philippa Foot - 1997 - In Daniel Statman (ed.), Noûs. Georgetown University Press. pp. 163--177.
Citations of this work BETA
Three Cheers for Double Effect.Dana Kay Nelkin & Samuel C. Rickless - 2014 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 89 (1):125-158.
The Doctrine of Double Effect: Intention and Permissibility.William J. FitzPatrick - 2012 - Philosophy Compass 7 (3):183-196.
So Close, Yet So Far: Why Solutions to the Closeness Problem for the Doctrine of Double Effect Fall Short.Dana Kay Nelkin & Samuel C. Rickless - 2015 - Noûs 49 (2):376-409.
Distinguishing Between Three Versions of the Doctrine of Double Effect Hypothesis in Moral Psychology.Simon Fitzpatrick - 2014 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology 5 (4):505-525.
The Closeness Problem and the Doctrine of Double Effect: A Way Forward.S. Matthew Liao - 2016 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 10 (4):849-863.
Similar books and articles
The Contralife Argument and the Principle of Double Effect.Lawrence Masek - 2011 - National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 11 (1):83-97.
The Loop Case and Kamm's Doctrine of Triple Effect.S. Matthew Liao - 2009 - Philosophical Studies 146 (2):223 - 231.
Who is Entitled to Double Effect?Joseph Boyle - 1991 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (5):475-494.
To Double Business Bound.Neil Delaney - 2001 - American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 75 (4):561-583.
The Principle of Double-Effect in a Clinical Context.Rainer Dziewas, Christoph Kellinghaus & Peter S.�R.�S. - 2003 - Poiesis and Praxis 1 (3):211-218.
Four Versions of Double Effect.Donald B. Marquis - 1991 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (5):515-544.
The Theoretical Tenability of the Doctrine of Double Effect.Iii Get Checked Abstract Thomas J. Bole - 1991 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (5).
Intentions, Motives and the Doctrine of Double Effect.Lawrence Masek - 2010 - Philosophical Quarterly 60 (240):567-585.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads182 ( #24,612 of 2,169,100 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #60,980 of 2,169,100 )
How can I increase my downloads?