Bombers: Some comments on double effect and harmful involvement

Journal of Military Ethics 3 (1):16-26 (2004)
Typically, in cases where an agent's actions produce foreseen harmful consequences, we morally discriminate in favor of scenarios in which those consequences are unintended. This intuitive distinction plays a particularly important role in our moral assessment of military strategies, especially when innocent bystanders may be involved. However, the analysis of the general principles governing such pre-theoretical inclinations must inevitably confront difficult and obstinate philosophical problems. As has often been pointed out, the criteria proposed by the traditional view on this issue, the so-called Doctrine of Double Effect, are dependent upon the description of the agent's intentional profile in an intuitively inadmissible way. As a solution to the Doctrine's shortcomings, contemporary philosophers have proposed analyses in which the notion of harmful involvement plays a central role. The main thesis of this paper is that appeals to harmful involvement do not provide the desired solution. Given the pervasive role played by the assessment of an agent's intentions in our moral evaluation of the use of military force in particular situations, the philosophical puzzles raised in this paper bring to the foreground a set of correlated problems of unequivocal relevance for the discipline of military ethics
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1080/15027570310004212
 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: 24,470
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

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Dana Kay Nelkin & Samuel C. Rickless (2014). Three Cheers for Double Effect. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 89 (1):125-158.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Richard Hull (2000). Deconstructing the Doctrine of Double Effect. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 3 (2):195-207.
Dana Kay Nelkin & Samuel C. Rickless (2014). Three Cheers for Double Effect. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 89 (1):125-158.
Jeff McMahan (1994). Revising the Doctrine of Double Effect. Journal of Applied Philosophy 11 (2):201-212.
Joseph Boyle (1991). Who is Entitled to Double Effect? Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (5):475-494.
P. A. Woodward (2003). Nancy Davis and the Means-End Relation. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 77 (3):437-457.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

20 ( #232,973 of 1,925,574 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #418,223 of 1,925,574 )

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.