A View from Two Sides: The Principle and its Cases
This response proceeds in three sections, each focusing on the role of cases in understanding the principle of double effect. The first section asks about the relationship between the principle and its cases: Does the principle authorize the cases or do the cases authorize the principle? To illustra...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Oxford University Press
1997
|
| In: |
Christian bioethics
Year: 1997, Volume: 3, Issue: 2, Pages: 158-172 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Parallel Edition: | Non-electronic
|
| Summary: | This response proceeds in three sections, each focusing on the role of cases in understanding the principle of double effect. The first section asks about the relationship between the principle and its cases: Does the principle authorize the cases or do the cases authorize the principle? To illustrate the latter claim's plausibility, certain aspects of the articles by Aulisio, Berkman, and Odozor are highlighted. Section two uses the cases of bombing in warfare and self-defense to explain reservations Mennonites are likely to harbor about the principle. The third section focuses on a medical case to show why a concern for virtue must attend to the principle's distinction between what is intended and what is merely foreseen. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1744-4195 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Christian bioethics
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1093/cb/3.2.158 |