Abstract
This article analyzes the category of extreme cases—cases involving catastrophic consequences the avoiding of which requires severe measures (e.g., torture, shooting a plane in 9/11 situations). Our proposal maintains that what is most pernicious is not the violation of moral rules as such but their principled or rule-governed violation. Maintaining a normative distinction between acts performed under the direction of principles/rules, on the one hand, and unprincipled, context-generated acts, acts performed under the force of circumstances, on the other, allows for accommodating the necessity of infringements in extreme cases within a (non-conventional) deontological framework. Agents who perform acts in extreme cases ought not to be guided by rules or principles. Instead, they ought to make particular judgments not governed by rules.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Ius Gentium |
| Publisher | Springer Science and Business Media B.V. |
| Pages | 101-118 |
| Number of pages | 18 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 2018 |
Publication series
| Name | Ius Gentium |
|---|---|
| Volume | 64 |
| ISSN (Electronic) | 2214-9902 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2018, Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature.
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Dignity, Emergency, Exception'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver