7 found
Order:
  1.  8
    Theorising the Political Apology.Stephen Winter - 2015 - Journal of Political Philosophy 23 (3):261-281.
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  2.  46
    Against Posthumous Rights.Stephen Winter - 2010 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 27 (2):186-199.
    A number of prominent nonconsequentialists support the thesis that we can wrong the dead by violating their moral claims. In contrast, this study suggests that the arguments offered by Thomson, Scanlon, Dworkin, Feinberg and others do not warrant posthumous rights because having claim-grounding interests requires an entity to have the capacity to experience significance. If dead people don't have this capacity, there is no reason to attribute claims to them. Raising doubts about prominent hypothetical examples of ‘no-effect injury’, the study (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  3.  8
    Justice Through Apologies: Remorse, Reform and Punishment, Written by Nick Smith.Stephen Winter - 2018 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 15 (3):375-378.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4.  11
    Uncertain Justice: History and Reparations.Stephen Winter - 2006 - Journal of Social Philosophy 37 (3):342–359.
  5.  9
    On the Possibilities of Group Injury.Stephen Winter - 2006 - Metaphilosophy 37 (3-4):393–413.
  6.  4
    On the Uses and Abuse of Political Apologies.Stephen Winter - 2016 - Contemporary Political Theory 15 (1):e44-e47.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7. Against Posthumous Rights.Stephen Winter - 2010 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 27 (2):186-199.
    abstractA number of prominent nonconsequentialists support the thesis that we can wrong the dead by violating their moral claims. In contrast, this study suggests that the arguments offered by Thomson, Scanlon, Dworkin, Feinberg and others do not warrant posthumous rights because having claim‐grounding interests requires an entity to have the capacity to experience significance. If dead people don't have this capacity, there is no reason to attribute claims to them. Raising doubts about prominent hypothetical examples of ‘no‐effect injury’, the study (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark