Doctrine of Double Effect

Doctrine of Double Effect

A harmful effect may be permissible if it is merely foreseen and not intended

Doctrine of Double Effect

A harmful effect may be permissible if it is merely foreseen and not intended: that is, not a means to the good end.

Doctrine of Double Effect

A harmful effect may be permissible if it is merely foreseen and not intended: that is, not a means to the good end. Three conditions:

Doctrine of Double Effect

A harmful effect may be permissible if it is merely foreseen and not intended: that is, not a means to the good end. Three conditions: 1. The harm must not be intended or necessary to achieve the good end.

Doctrine of Double Effect

A harmful effect may be permissible if it is merely foreseen and not intended: that is, not a means to the good end. Three conditions: 1. The harm must not be intended or necessary to achieve the good end. 2. The intended good must be greater than the anticipated harm.

Doctrine of Double Effect

A harmful effect may be permissible if it is merely foreseen and not intended: that is, not a means to the good end. Three conditions: 1. The harm must not be intended or necessary to achieve the good end. 2. The intended good must be greater than the anticipated harm. 3. There must be no less harmful way of achieving the good end.

Doctrine of Double Effect

A harmful effect may be permissible if it is merely foreseen and not intended: that is, not a means to the good end. Three conditions: 1. The harm must not be intended or necessary to achieve the good end. 2. The intended good must be greater than the anticipated harm. 3. There must be no less harmful way of achieving the good end.

Two cases can have the same outcomes, but in one case the action is permitted and in the other it is not.

Doctrine of Double Effect

A harmful effect may be permissible if it is merely foreseen and not intended: that is, not a means to the good end. Three conditions: 1. The harm must not be intended or necessary to achieve the good end. 2. The intended good must be greater than the anticipated harm. 3. There must be no less harmful way of achieving the good end.

Two cases can have the same outcomes, but in one case the action is permitted and in the other it is not.
Consequentialist criticism

Doctrine of Double Effect

A harmful effect may be permissible if it is merely foreseen and not intended: that is, not a means to the good end. Three conditions: 1. The harm must not be intended or necessary to achieve the good end. 2. The intended good must be greater than the anticipated harm. 3. There must be no less harmful way of achieving the good end.

Two cases can have the same outcomes, but in one case the action is permitted and in the other it is not.
Consequentialist criticism: If you act deliberately, and you foresee the harmful consequences, how can you claim that you don't intend for the harm to happen?

Doctrine of Double Effect

A harmful effect may be permissible if it is merely foreseen and not intended: that is, not a means to the good end. Three conditions: 1. The harm must not be intended or necessary to achieve the good end. 2. The intended good must be greater than the anticipated harm. 3. There must be no less harmful way of achieving the good end.

Two cases can have the same outcomes, but in one case the action is permitted and in the other it is not.
Consequentialist criticism: If you act deliberately, and you foresee the harmful consequences, how can you claim that you don't intend for the harm to happen? Deliberate/accidental distinction not the same as intended/unintended.