To kill is not the same as to let die: a reply to Coggon

Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (7):456-458 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Coggon’s remarks on a previous paper on active and passive euthanasia elicit a clarification and an elaboration of the argument in support of the claim that there is a moral difference between killing and letting die. The relevant moral duties are different in nature, strength and content. Moreover, not all people who are involved in the relevant situations have the same moral duties. The particular case that is presented in support of the claim that to kill is not the same as to let die is based upon a rejection of consequentialism

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,990

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Murdering an Accident Victim: A New Objection to the Bare-Difference Argument.Scott Hill - 2018 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 96 (4):767-778.
An Irrelevant Consideration: Killing Versus Letting Die (2nd edition).Michael Tooley - 1994 - In Bonnie Steinbock & Alastair Norcross (eds.), Killing and letting die. New York: Fordham University Press. pp. 103–111.
An Irrelevant Consideration: Killing Versus Letting Die.Michael Tooley - 1994 - In Bonnie Steinbock & Alastair Norcross (eds.), Killing and letting die. New York: Fordham University Press. pp. 56–62.
Killing and letting die.James Rachels - 2001 - In Lawrence C. Becker & Charlotte Becker (eds.), Encyclopedia of Ethics, 2nd edition. Routledge.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-09-13

Downloads
32 (#488,220)

6 months
2 (#1,448,208)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

References found in this work

On acts, omissions and responsibility.J. Coggon - 2008 - Journal of Medical Ethics 34 (8):576-579.

Add more references