Show simple item record

dc.creatorQuinn, Warrenen
dc.date.accessioned2015-05-05T18:30:46Zen
dc.date.available2015-05-05T18:30:46Zen
dc.date.created1991-10en
dc.date.issued1991-10en
dc.identifier10.1017/CBO9781139172677en
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationJournal of Medicine and Philosophy. 1991 Oct; 16(5): 511-514.en
dc.identifier.issn0360-5310en
dc.identifier.urihttp://worldcatlibraries.org/registry/gateway?version=1.0&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&atitle=Reply+to+Boyle's+"who+Is+Entitled+to+Double+Effect?"&title=Journal+of+Medicine+and+Philosophy.++&volume=16&issue=5&pages=511-514&date=1991&au=Quinn,+Warrenen
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139172677en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10822/736700en
dc.description.abstractI have only minor quibbles with Boyle's presentation of my version of the Doctrine of Double Effect (DDE) (Boyle, 1991). On my view, the extra morally problematic element in cases of direct intention is the subordination of a victim to purposes that he or she either rightfully rejects or (and this is something that I should now wish to add in light of Boyle's criticisms) cannot rightfully accept. In cases of indirect intention the victim is incidentally affected by an agent's strategy, but in cases of direct intention the victim is made part of the strategy. Boyle suggests at one point that this amounts to using the person....But I do not think the "using" metaphor is always apt in these cases, although it is perhaps helpful in pointing to the objectionable element in direct intention, which in its perfectly general form can be put only more abstractly....My only other concern with Boyle's exposition of my view involves his use of the expression "intentionally harming"....The discussion there tends to suggest, in contrast to what Boyle has said earlier, that I represent DDE as discriminating between cases of incidental and intentional harming. But this is precisely what I tried to avoid....en
dc.formatArticleen
dc.languageenen
dc.sourceBRL:KIE/34678en
dc.subjectBioethical Issuesen
dc.subjectBioethicsen
dc.subjectDecision Makingen
dc.subjectDouble Effecten
dc.subjectDrugsen
dc.subjectEthical Analysisen
dc.subjectEthical Theoryen
dc.subjectEuthanasiaen
dc.subjectInjuriesen
dc.subjectIntentionen
dc.subjectKillingen
dc.subjectMetaphoren
dc.subjectPainen
dc.subjectPhilosophyen
dc.subjectTerminal Careen
dc.titleReply to Boyle's "Who Is Entitled to Double Effect?"en
dc.provenanceDigital citation created by the National Reference Center for Bioethics Literature at Georgetown University for the BIOETHICSLINE database, part of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics' Bioethics Information Retrieval Project funded by the United States National Library of Medicine.en
dc.provenanceDigital citation migrated from OpenText LiveLink Discovery Server database named NBIO hosted by the Bioethics Research Library to the DSpace collection BioethicsLine hosted by Georgetown University.en


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


Georgetown University Seal
©2009—2022 Bioethics Research Library
Box 571212 Washington DC 20057-1212
202.687.3885