About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

13 Crim. L. & Phil. 1 (2019)

handle is hein.journals/crimlpy13 and id is 1 raw text is: Criminal Law, Philosophy (2019) 13:1-25 CmssMark https://doi.org/10.1007/si 1572-018-9456-y QR1I\AL P'APER....... Wild Goose Chase: Still No Rationales for the Doctrine of Double Effect and Related Principles Uwe Steinhoff' Published online: 23 February 2018 © Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018 Abstract I focus on the question as to what rationale could possibly underlie the doctrine of double effect (DDE) or related principles. I first briefly review the correct critiques of the claim that people who intend some evil as a means to a good must be guided by evil, and that this is allegedly always wrong. I then argue that Quinn's claim that violations of the DDE express certain negative attitudes of the agent and that agents violating the DDE must make an additional morally problematic pre- sumption regarding their victims is mistaken. Tadros claims that an agent violating the means principle must force his victims to adopt his goals. I demonstrate that the difference Tadros tries to construe between an agent inflicting intended harm and an agent inflicting merely foreseen harm is non-existent. Sarch's official rationale for the DDE also fails to distinguish harming as a means from side-effect harming, and reformulations of his rationale that suggest themselves run into severe problems. Walen's defense of the means principle in terms of the restricting claims principle and Overland's appeal to moral obstacles are susceptible to counter-examples and appear to be question-begging. Recently, Walen has offered a revised formulation of his Restricting Claims Principle, claiming that it overcomes counter-examples and explains the means principle. I will argue that it contradicts the means principle and does not overcome the counter-examples. Thus I conclude that so far we are still left without a reasonable rationale for the DDE or related principles. Keywords Doctrine of double effect - Means principle - Moral obstacles Warren S. Quinn - Rationale - Restricting claims - Alexander Sarch - Victor Tadros Alec Walen E Uwe Steinhoff ustnhoff@hku.hk Department of Politics and Public Administration, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, China I_) Springer

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most