The Principle of Objectified Circumstances (POC): Clarifying the Proximate End
This paper seeks to clarify the proximate end. A distinction is made between the definition of an act and the identification of an act. The principle of objectified circumstances (POC) is postulated which, without expanding beyond the proximate end, gives due weight to both the perspective of the ac...
| Published in: | Heythrop journal |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Wiley-Blackwell
2015
|
| In: |
Heythrop journal
|
| IxTheo Classification: | NCA Ethics |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | This paper seeks to clarify the proximate end. A distinction is made between the definition of an act and the identification of an act. The principle of objectified circumstances (POC) is postulated which, without expanding beyond the proximate end, gives due weight to both the perspective of the acting person and the context within which an act occurs. POC is used to help discern the object contained within the proximate end. It is applied to the issues of euthanasia, lying, mutilation, and the controversy between Martin Rhonheimer and Janet Smith concerning the use of condoms for HIV protection. The challenge of angelism is addressed. The paper argues that the object, located exclusively in the proximate end, can be understood in a way that is sensitive to both traditionalist and proportionalist schools of thought. POC opens up an avenue of thought for fresh dialogue concerning the identification of the moral object. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1468-2265 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Heythrop journal
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1111/heyj.12041 |