KILLING, LETTING DIE AND THE BARE DIFFERENCE ARGUMENT

I believe that there is no intrinsic moral difference between killing and letting die. That is, there is no difference that depends solely on the distinction between an act and an omission. I also believe that we can reasonably establish this thesis by appeal to the Bare Difference Argument. The for...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Perrett, Royw (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Wiley-Blackwell 1996
In: Bioethics
Year: 1996, Volume: 10, Issue: 2, Pages: 131-139
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002 4500
001 1781876304
003 DE-627
005 20211211042735.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 211211s1996 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1111/j.1467-8519.1996.tb00112.x  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1781876304 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1781876304 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Perrett, Royw  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a KILLING, LETTING DIE AND THE BARE DIFFERENCE ARGUMENT 
264 1 |c 1996 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a I believe that there is no intrinsic moral difference between killing and letting die. That is, there is no difference that depends solely on the distinction between an act and an omission. I also believe that we can reasonably establish this thesis by appeal to the Bare Difference Argument. The form of this argument involves considering two imaginary cases in which there are no morally relevant differences present, save the bare difference that one is a case of killing and one a case of letting die. But in the pair of cases under consideration this bare difference makes no moral difference. Hence it cannot be that the bare difference between killing and letting die is in itself a morally important difference. Winston Nesbitt has recently argued that the Bare Difference Argument fails because “the examples produced typically possess a feature which makes their use in this context illegitimate, and that when modified to remove this feature, they provide support for the view which they were designed to undermine”. I argue that Nesbitt misunderstands the logic of the Bare Difference Argument and that accordingly his objections are mistaken. 
601 |a Argumentation 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Bioethics  |d Oxford [u.a.] : Wiley-Blackwell, 1987  |g 10(1996), 2, Seite 131-139  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)271596708  |w (DE-600)1480658-7  |w (DE-576)078707986  |x 1467-8519  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:10  |g year:1996  |g number:2  |g pages:131-139 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8519.1996.tb00112.x  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-8519.1996.tb00112.x  |x Verlag  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4018999283 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1781876304 
LOK |0 005 20211211042735 
LOK |0 008 211211||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2021-12-10#855738A2946F611EF12E2576CB1AC1C2B7DB0CAC 
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 ixrk  |a zota 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw