works
Warren S. Quinn Actions, intentions, and consequences: the doctrine of doing and allowing article The paper considers the moral relevance of the distinction between action and inaction in the production of harm. It critically examines the views of Philippa Foot and Jonathan Bennett and it defends a rights-based version of the thesis that harmful action is harder to justify than is harmful inaction. It thus draws an “anticonsequentialist” conclusion.

Actions, intentions, and consequences: the doctrine of doing and allowing

Warren S. Quinn

Philosophical review, vol. 98, no. 3, 1989, pp. 287–312

Abstract

The paper considers the moral relevance of the distinction between action and inaction in the production of harm. It critically examines the views of Philippa Foot and Jonathan Bennett and it defends a rights-based version of the thesis that harmful action is harder to justify than is harmful inaction. It thus draws an “anticonsequentialist” conclusion.

PDF

First page of PDF