排序方式: 共有3条查询结果,搜索用时 0 毫秒
1
1.
In this essay, we explore an issue of moral uncertainty: what we are permitted to do when we are unsure about which moral principles are correct. We develop a novel approach to this issue that incorporates important insights from previous work on moral uncertainty, while avoiding some of the difficulties that beset existing alternative approaches. Our approach is based on evaluating and choosing between option sets rather than particular conduct options. We show how our approach is particularly well-suited to address this issue of moral uncertainty with respect to agents that have credence in moral theories that are not fully consequentialist. 相似文献
2.
Many believe that intended harms are more difficult to justify than are harms that result as a foreseen side effect of one's conduct. We describe cases of harming in which the harm is not intended, yet the harmful act nevertheless runs afoul of the intuitive moral constraint that governs intended harms. We note that these cases provide new and improved counterexamples to the so-called Simple View, according to which intentionally phi-ing requires intending to phi. We then give a new theory of the moral relevance of intention. This theory yields the traditional constraint on intending harm as a special case, along with several stronger demands. 相似文献
3.
F. M. Kamm 《The Journal of Ethics》2005,9(3-4):381-401
This article begins by comparing terror and death and then focuses on whether killing combatants and noncombatants as a mere
means to create terror, that is in turn a means to winning a war, is ever permissible. The role of intentions and alternative
acts one might have done is examined in this regard. The second part of the article begins by criticizing a standard justification
for causing collateral (side effect) deaths in war and offers an alternative justification that makes use of the idea of group
liability.
* This article is a shortened version of my “Failures of Just War Theory: Terror, Harm, and Justice,” Ethics 114 (July 2004), pp. 650–694, with the addition of new material on the use of terror in Section 2. 相似文献
1