Doing Harm, Allowing Harm, and Denying Resources

Title:
Doing Harm, Allowing Harm, and Denying Resources
Authors:
Hall, Tim
Abstract:
Of great importance to many non-consequentialists is a claimed moral difference between doing and allowing harm. I argue that non-consequentialism is best understood, however, as consisting in three morally distinct categories where commentators typically identify two: standard doings of harm, standard allowings of harm, and denials of resources. Furthermore, the moral distinctness of denials of resources is independent of whether denials are doings or allowings of harm, I argue. I argue by way of matched examples, as well as by way of two widely accepted features of non-consequentialism: stringent rights of persons, and the susceptibility of resources to distribution within political society.
Citation:
Hall, Tim. 2008. "Doing Harm, Allowing Harm, and Denying Resources." Journal Of Moral Philosophy 5(1): 77-95.
Publisher:
Brill Academic Publishers
DATE ISSUED:
2008
Department:
Philosophy
Type:
article
PUBLISHED VERSION:
10.1163/174552408X306726
PERMANENT LINK:
http://hdl.handle.net/11282/309481

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorHall, Timen_US
dc.date.accessioned2013-12-23T16:10:31Zen
dc.date.available2013-12-23T16:10:31Zen
dc.date.issued2008en
dc.identifier.citationHall, Tim. 2008. "Doing Harm, Allowing Harm, and Denying Resources." Journal Of Moral Philosophy 5(1): 77-95.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1740-4681en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11282/309481en
dc.description.abstractOf great importance to many non-consequentialists is a claimed moral difference between doing and allowing harm. I argue that non-consequentialism is best understood, however, as consisting in three morally distinct categories where commentators typically identify two: standard doings of harm, standard allowings of harm, and denials of resources. Furthermore, the moral distinctness of denials of resources is independent of whether denials are doings or allowings of harm, I argue. I argue by way of matched examples, as well as by way of two widely accepted features of non-consequentialism: stringent rights of persons, and the susceptibility of resources to distribution within political society.en_US
dc.publisherBrill Academic Publishersen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1163/174552408X306726en
dc.subject.departmentPhilosophyen_US
dc.titleDoing Harm, Allowing Harm, and Denying Resourcesen_US
dc.typearticleen_US
dc.identifier.journalJournal Of Moral Philosophyen_US
dc.identifier.volume5en_US
dc.identifier.issue1en_US
dc.identifier.startpage77en_US
All Items in The Five Colleges of Ohio Digital Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.