Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Two Distinctions That Do Make a Difference: The Action/Omission Distinction and the Principle of Double Effect.Timothy Chappell - 2002 - Philosophy 77 (2):211-233.
    The paper outlines and explores a possible strategy for defending both the action/omission distinction (AOD) and the principle of double effect (PDE). The strategy is to argue that there are degrees of actionhood, and that we are in general less responsible for what has a lower degree of actionhood, because of that lower degree. Moreover, what we omit generally has a lower degree of actionhood than what we actively do, and what we do under known-but-not-intended descriptions generally has a lower (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   17 citations  
  • Errors About Errors: Virtue Theory and Trait Attribution.Gopal Sreenivasan - 2002 - Mind 111 (441):47-68.
    This paper examines the implications of certain social psychological experiments for moral theory—specifically, for virtue theory. Gilbert Harman and John Doris have recently argued that the empirical evidence offered by ‘situationism’ demonstrates that there is no such thing as a character trait. I dispute this conclusion. My discussion focuses on the proper interpretation of the experimental data—the data themselves I grant for the sake of argument. I develop three criticisms of the anti-trait position. Of these, the central criticism concerns three (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   102 citations  
  • Intention, Intentional Action and Moral Considerations.J. Knobe - 2004 - Analysis 64 (2):181-187.
  • Intention.G. E. M. Anscombe - 1957 - Harvard University Press.
    This is a welcome reprint of a book that continues to grow in importance.
  • The Doctrine of Triple Effect and Why a Rational Agent Need Not Intend the Means to His End, I.Frances M. Kamm - 2000 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 74 (1):21–39.
    In this article I am concerned with whether it could be morally significant to distinguish between doing something 'in order to bring about an effect' as opposed to 'doing something because we will bring about an effect'. For example, the Doctrine of Double Effect tells us that we should not act in order to bring about evil, but even if this is true is it perhaps permissible to act only because an evil will thus occur? I discuss these questions in (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  • The Doctrine of Triple Effect and Why a Rational Agent Need Not Intend the Means to His End.Frances M. Kamm - 2000 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes( 74:21-39.
    In this article I am concerned with whether it could be morally significant to distinguish between doing something 'in order to bring about an effect' as opposed to 'doing something because we will bring about an effect'. For example, the Doctrine of Double Effect tells us that we should not act in order to bring about evil, but even if this is true is it perhaps permissible to act only because an evil will thus occur? I discuss these questions in (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • Defending Double Effect.Alison Hills - 2003 - Philosophical Studies 116 (2):133-152.
    According to the doctrine of double effect(DDE), there is a morally significantdifference between harm that is intended andharm that is merely foreseen and not intended.It is not difficult to explain why it is bad tointend harm as an end (you have a ``badattitude'' toward that harm) but it is hard toexplain why it is bad to intend harm as a meansto some good end. If you intend harm as a meansto some good end, you need not have a ``badattitude'' toward (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  • Morality and Action.Warren Quinn - 1993 - Cambridge University Press.
    Warren Quinn was widely regarded as a moral philosopher of remarkable talent. This collection of his most important contributions to moral philosophy and the philosophy of action has been edited for publication by Philippa Foot. Quinn laid out the foundations for an anti-utilitarian moral philosophy that was critical of much contemporary work in ethics, such as the anti-realism of Gilbert Harman and the neo-subjectivism of Bernard Williams. Quinn's own distinctive moral theory is developed in the discussion of substantial, practical moral (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   53 citations  
  • The Doctrine of Triple Effect and Why a Rational Agent Need Not Intend the Means to His End, I.Francesm Kamm - 2000 - Supplement to the Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 74 (1):21-39.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  • Lack of Character: Personality and Moral Behavior.John M. Doris - 2002 - Cambridge University Press.
    This book is a provocative contribution to contemporary ethical theory challenging foundational conceptions of character that date back to Aristotle. John Doris draws on behavioral science, especially social psychology, to argue that we misattribute the causes of behavior to personality traits and other fixed aspects of character rather than to the situational context. More often than not it is the situation not the nature of the personality that really counts. The author elaborates the philosophical consequences of this research for a (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   263 citations  
  • Intentional Action and Side Effects in Ordinary Language.J. Knobe - 2003 - Analysis 63 (3):190-194.
    There has been a long-standing dispute in the philosophical literature about the conditions under which a behavior counts as 'intentional.' Much of the debate turns on questions about the use of certain words and phrases in ordinary language. The present paper investigates these questions empirically, using experimental techniques to investigate people's use of the relevant words and phrases. g.
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   324 citations  
  • Two Distinctions That Do Make a Difference.Chappell Timothy - 2002 - Philosophy 77 (2):211-233.
    The paper outlines and explores a possible strategy for defending both the action/omission distinction and the principle of double effect. The strategy is to argue that there are degrees of actionhood, and that we are in general less responsible for what has a lower degree of actionhood, because of that lower degree. Moreover, what we omit generally has a lower degree of actionhood than what we actively do, and what we do under known-but-not-intended descriptions generally has a lower degree of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  • The Doctrine of Double Effect: Reflections on Theoretical and Practical Issues.Frances M. Kamm - 1991 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (5):571-585.
    The Doctrine of Double Effect and the Principle of Do No Harm raise important theoretical and practical issues, some of which are discussed by Boyle, Donagan, and Quinn. I argue that neither principle is correct, and some revisionist, and probably nonabsolutist, analysis of constraints on action and omission is necessary. In making these points, I examine several approaches to deflection of threat cases, discuss an argument for the permissibility of voluntary euthanasia, and present arguments relevant to medical contexts which justify (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Quinn on Double Effect: The Problem of "Closeness".John Martin Fischer, Mark Ravizza & David Copp - 1993 - Ethics 103 (4):707-725.
  • Situationism and Virtue Ethics on the Content of Our Character.Rachana Kamtekar - 2004 - Ethics 114 (3):458-491.
    Situationist social psychologists tell us that information about people’s distinctive character traits, opinions, attitudes, values, or past behavior is not as useful for determining what they will do as is information about the details of their situations.1 One would expect, they say, that the possessor of a given character trait (such as helpfulness) would behave consistently (helpfully) across situations that are similar in calling for the relevant (helping) behavior, but under experimental conditions, people’s behavior is not found to be cross-situationally (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   135 citations  
  • Punishment and Responsibility.H. L. A. Hart - 1968 - Philosophy 45 (172):162-162.
  • Virtues and Vices.Phillipa Foot - 1997 - In Thomas L. Carson & Paul K. Moser (eds.), Morality and the Good Life. Oup Usa.
  • The Doctrine of Triple Effect and Why a Rational Agent Need Not Intend the Means to His End.Frances Kamm & John Harris - 2000 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 74:21-39.
    In this article I am concerned with whether it could be morally significant to distinguish between doing something 'in order to bring about an effect' as opposed to 'doing something because we will bring about an effect'. For example, the Doctrine of Double Effect tells us that we should not act in order to bring about evil, but even if this is true is it perhaps permissible to act only because an evil will thus occur? I discuss these questions in (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  • Review: Non-Consequentialism, the Person as an End-in-Itself, and the Significance of Status. [REVIEW]F. M. Kamm - 1992 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 21 (4):354 - 389.
  • I–Frances M. Kamm.Frances M. Kamm - 2000 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 74 (1):21-39.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  • Doing Away with Double Effect.Alison McIntyre - 2001 - Ethics 111 (2):219-255.
    I will introduce six constraints that should guide the formulation and use of DE. One goal in listing them is to engage in dialectical fair play by ruling out criticisms of the doctrine that are directed at misformulations of DE or that result from misapplications of it. Each of these constraints should be acceptable to any proponent of DE. Yet when these constraints on the application of DE are respected, it becomes clear that many of the examples provided as illustrations (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   59 citations  
  • Virtues and Vices.Philippa Foot - 1997 - In Daniel Statman (ed.), Noûs. Georgetown University Press. pp. 163--177.
    'Foot stands out among contemporary ethical theorists because of her conviction that virtues and vices are more central ethical notions than rights, duties, justice, or consequences - the primary focus of most other contemporary theorists. This volume brings together a dozen essays published between 1957 and 1977, and includes two new ones as well. In the first, Foot argues explicitly for an ethic of virtue, and in the next five discusses abortion, euthanasia, free will/determination, and the ethics of Hume and (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   93 citations  
  • The Doctrine of Double Effect: Problems of Interpretation.Nancy Davis - 1984 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 65 (2):107.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   22 citations