Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    On Quinn's reformulation, this structural feature—not sub... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The soldier who throws himself on a grenade to shield fellow soldiers does not intend his own death as a means, but merely foresees it as a side effect, if Double Effect explains the permissibility of his action.

    On Quinn's reformulation, this structural feature—not subjective intent—determines whether harm is direct, undermining the claim that Double Effect cleanly vindicates the soldier's action.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Intent is unreliable for moral distinction; structural causation provides objective, verifiable criteria independent of agent psychology.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If Double Effect relies on intent, soldiers could rationalize any collateral harm as merely foreseen, making doctrine permissive and unstable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Quinn's structural approach correctly identifies that harm through causal mechanism differs morally from harm as side-effect, regardless of mental states.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Moral significance of actions partly depends on what agents aim at; pure structural analysis ignores why distinction between intended and foreseen matters.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Determining 'directness' structurally requires controversial judgments about causal pathways that may be equally subjective as assessing intent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Double Effect's core insight—that intended versus foreseen harm differ morally—remains valid even if implementation requires both intent and structure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Key Terms

    Direct harm(as a key distinction in Double Effect doctrine)
    Harm that is the main point or means of an action, rather than an unintended side effect.
    Double Effect(Used to evaluate the permissibility of actions like the grenade case and lethal self-defense.)
    A principle that permits an action with harmful results when the harm is foreseen but not intended as a means or end, and the good effect justifies tolerating the foreseen harm.
    Quinn(as referenced in philosophy of religion)
    Philip L. Quinn, a philosopher of religion who argued that God's commands can ground moral obligations even if God's will is necessary.
    Structural feature(as what the statement claims configuration-space separation is)
    A fundamental, built-in aspect of how something works—as opposed to something that just happens to occur by chance.
    Subjective intent(as contrasted with structural features)
    What someone personally means to accomplish or bring about when they act; their internal purpose or goal.
    Vindicates(as used in philosophy of science)
    Proves that something was right or justified, usually by showing evidence that supports it after there was doubt.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Bioethics1 linkedMoral Responsibility1 linked

    Related

    Determining 'directness' structurally requires controversial judgments about cau...Double Effect's core insight—that intended versus foreseen harm differ morally—r...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit
    If Double Effect relies on intent, soldiers could rationalize any collateral har...
    Intent is unreliable for moral distinction; structural causation provides object...
    +3 moreShow less
    Moral significance of actions partly depends on what agents aim at; pure structu...Quinn's structural approach correctly identifies that harm through causal mechan...The soldier who throws himself on a grenade to shield fellow soldiers does not i...