The Limits of Double Effect

Ir. the decades since Anscombe re-introduced the distinction between intention and foresight into philosophical ethics, supporters and critics of the related principle of double effect (PDE) have displayed disagreement and confusion about its application and scope. The key to correct interpretation...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association
Main Author: Giebel, Heidi M. (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: [2015]
In: Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association
RelBib Classification:NCA Ethics
VA Philosophy
Further subjects:B DOUBLE effect (Ethics)
B contextual analysis
B Intention
B Interpersonal Relations
B Philosophy
Online Access: Volltext (doi)

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002 4500
001 1578190819
003 DE-627
005 20180802105436.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 180802s2015 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.5840/acpaproc201692946  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1578190819 
035 |a (DE-576)508190819 
035 |a (DE-599)BSZ508190819 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Giebel, Heidi M.  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 4 |a The Limits of Double Effect  |c Heidi M. Giebel 
264 1 |c [2015] 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Ir. the decades since Anscombe re-introduced the distinction between intention and foresight into philosophical ethics, supporters and critics of the related principle of double effect (PDE) have displayed disagreement and confusion about its application and scope. The key to correct interpretation and application of PDE, I argue, is recognition of its limits: (1) the principle does not include an account of the goodness or badness of effects; (2) it does not include an account of intention; (3) PDE does not specify a particular action as right or obligatory; and (4) rhe privacy of intention limits its application in interpersonal and legal contexts. While all four of these features are "limits" in the sense that they are things PDE does not do, I argue that (a) only the fourth is a real limitation or disadvantage of the principle--and (b) none of the limits implies that the principle should be rejected. 
650 4 |a contextual analysis 
650 4 |a DOUBLE effect (Ethics) 
650 4 |a Intention 
650 4 |a Interpersonal Relations 
650 4 |a Philosophy 
652 |a NCA:VA 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |a American Catholic Philosophical Association  |t Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association  |d Washington, DC, 1926  |g 89(2015), Seite 143-157  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)376274395  |w (DE-600)2130243-1  |w (DE-576)443083517  |x 2153-7925  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:89  |g year:2015  |g pages:143-157 
856 |u https://doi.org/10.5840/acpaproc201692946  |x doi  |3 Volltext 
936 u w |d 89  |j 2015  |h 143-157 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 3020083044 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1578190819 
LOK |0 005 20180830110744 
LOK |0 008 180802||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixzo 
LOK |0 936ln  |0 1442053844  |a VA 
LOK |0 936ln  |0 1442052465  |a NCA 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw 
REL |a 1 
STA 0 0 |a Intention 
STB 0 0 |a Intention 
STC 0 0 |a Intención 
STD 0 0 |a Intenzione 
STE 0 0 |a 意图,打算,意向 
STF 0 0 |a 意圖,打算,意向 
STG 0 0 |a Intenção 
STH 0 0 |a Намерение 
STI 0 0 |a Πρόθεση 
SUB |a REL 

Similar Items

more