email page print pageAll Topic Reviews
Anger and Forgiveness"Are You There Alone?"10 Good Questions about Life and DeathA Casebook of Ethical Challenges in NeuropsychologyA Companion to BioethicsA Companion to BioethicsA Companion to GenethicsA Companion to GenethicsA Companion to Muslim EthicsA Cooperative SpeciesA Critique of the Moral Defense of VegetarianismA Delicate BalanceA Fragile LifeA Life for a LifeA Life-Centered Approach to BioethicsA Matter of SecurityA Natural History of Human MoralityA Philosophical DiseaseA Practical Guide to Clinical Ethics ConsultingA Question of TrustA Sentimentalist Theory of the MindA Short Stay in SwitzerlandA Tapestry of ValuesA Very Bad WizardA World Without ValuesAction and ResponsibilityAction Theory, Rationality and CompulsionActs of ConscienceAddiction and ResponsibilityAddiction NeuroethicsAdvance Directives in Mental HealthAfter HarmAftermathAgainst AutonomyAgainst BioethicsAgainst HealthAgainst MarriageAgainst Moral ResponsibilityAgency and AnswerabilityAgency and ResponsibilityAgency, Freedom, and Moral ResponsibilityAging, Biotechnology, and the FutureAlbert Schweitzer's Reverence for LifeAlphavilleAltruismAltruismAmerican EugenicsAmerican PsychosisAn American SicknessAn Anthology of Psychiatric EthicsAn Introduction to EthicsAn Introduction to Evolutionary EthicsAn Introduction to Kant's Moral Philosophy And a Time to DieAnimal LessonsAnimal RightsAnimals Like UsApplied Ethics in Mental Health CareAre Women Human?Arguments about AbortionAristotle on Practical WisdomAristotle's Ethics and Moral ResponsibilityAssisted Suicide and the Right to DieAutonomyAutonomy and the Challenges to LiberalismAutonomy, Consent and the LawBabies by DesignBackslidingBad PharmaBad SoulsBarriers and BelongingBasic Desert, Reactive Attitudes and Free WillBeauty JunkiesBefore ForgivingBeing AmoralBeing YourselfBending Over BackwardsBending ScienceBernard WilliamsBetter Humans?Better Than WellBeyond ChoiceBeyond GeneticsBeyond HatredBeyond Humanity?Beyond LossBeyond LossBeyond Moral JudgmentBeyond SpeechBeyond the DSM StoryBias in Psychiatric DiagnosisBioethicsBioethicsBioethics and the BrainBioethics at the MoviesBioethics Beyond the HeadlinesBioethics Critically ReconsideredBioethics in a Liberal SocietyBioethics in the ClinicBiomedical EthicsBiomedical EthicsBiomedical EthicsBiomedical EthicsBiomedical Research and BeyondBiosBioscience EthicsBipolar ChildrenBluebirdBodies out of BoundsBodies, Commodities, and BiotechnologiesBody BazaarBoundBoundaries and Boundary Violations in PsychoanalysisBraintrustBrandedBreaking the SilenceBuffy the Vampire Slayer and PhilosophyCapital PunishmentCase Studies in Biomedical Research EthicsChallenging the Stigma of Mental IllnessCharacter and Moral Psychology Character as Moral FictionChild Well-BeingChildrenChildren's RightsChoosing ChildrenChoosing Not to ChooseClinical Dilemmas in PsychotherapyClinical EthicsCloningClose toYouCoercion as CureCoercive Treatment in PsychiatryCognition of Value in Aristotle's EthicsCognitive Disability and Its Challenge to Moral Philosophy Comfortably NumbCommonsense RebellionCommunicative Action and Rational ChoiceCompetence, Condemnation, and CommitmentComprehending CareConducting Insanity EvaluationsConfidential RelationshipsConfidentiality and Mental HealthConflict of Interest in the ProfessionsConsuming KidsContemporary Debates In Applied EthicsContemporary Debates in Moral TheoryContemporary Debates in Social PhilosophyContentious IssuesContesting PsychiatryCrazy in AmericaCreating CapabilitiesCreatures Like Us?Crime and CulpabilityCrime, Punishment, and Mental IllnessCritical Perspectives in Public HealthCritical PsychiatryCrueltyCultural Assessment in Clinical PsychiatryCurrent Controversies in BioethicsCurrent Controversies in Values and ScienceCutting to the CoreCyborg CitizenDamaged IdentitiesDeaf Identities in the MakingDeath Is That Man Taking NamesDebating ProcreationDebating Same-Sex MarriageDecision Making, Personhood and DementiaDecoding the Ethics CodeDefining DifferenceDefining Right and Wrong in Brain ScienceDefining the Beginning and End of LifeDelusions of GenderDementiaDemocracy in What State?Demons of the Modern WorldDescriptions and PrescriptionsDesert and VirtueDesire, Practical Reason, and the GoodDestructive Trends in Mental HealthDeveloping the VirtuesDid My Neurons Make Me Do It?Difference and IdentityDigital HemlockDigital SoulDignityDisability BioethicsDisability, Difference, DiscriminationDiscrimination against the Mentally IllDisordered Personalities and CrimeDisorders of VolitionDisorientation and Moral LifeDivided Minds and Successive SelvesDoes Feminism Discriminate against Men?Does Torture Work?Double Standards in Medical Research in Developing CountriesDown GirlDrugs and JusticeDworkin and His CriticsDying in the Twenty-First CenturyEarly WarningEconomics and Youth ViolenceEmbodied RhetoricsEmerging Conceptual, Ethical and Policy Issues in BionanotechnologyEmotional ReasonEmotions in the Moral LifeEmotions in the Moral LifeEmpathyEmpathy and Moral DevelopmentEmpathy and MoralityEmpirical Ethics in PsychiatryEncountering NatureEncountering the Sacred in PsychotherapyEngendering International HealthEnhancing EvolutionEnhancing Human CapacitiesEnoughEros and the GoodErotic InnocenceErotic MoralityEssays on Derek Parfit's On What MattersEssays on Free Will and Moral ResponsibilityEthical Choices in Contemporary MedicineEthical Conflicts in PsychologyEthical Dilemmas in PediatricsEthical Issues in Behavioral ResearchEthical Issues in Dementia CareEthical Issues in Forensic Mental Health ResearchEthical Issues in the New GeneticsEthical LifeEthical Reasoning for Mental Health ProfessionalsEthical TheoryEthical WillsEthically Challenged ProfessionsEthicsEthicsEthicsEthics and AnimalsEthics and ScienceEthics and the A PrioriEthics and the Discovery of the UnconsciousEthics and the Metaphysics of MedicineEthics at the CinemaEthics at the End of LifeEthics Case Book of the American Psychoanalytic AssociationEthics Done RightEthics ExpertiseEthics for EveryoneEthics for PsychologistsEthics for the New MillenniumEthics in CyberspaceEthics in Health CareEthics In Health Services ManagementEthics in Mental Health ResearchEthics in PracticeEthics in PsychiatryEthics in PsychologyEthics in Psychotherapy and CounselingEthics of PsychiatryEthics without OntologyEthics, Culture, and PsychiatryEthics, Sexual Orientation, and Choices about ChildrenEvaluating the Science and Ethics of Research on HumansEvilEvil GenesEvil in Modern ThoughtEvil in Modern ThoughtEvolution, Gender, and RapeEvolutionary Ethics and Contemporary BiologyEvolutionary Psychology and ViolenceEvolved MoralityExperiments in EthicsExploding the Gene MythExploiting ChildhoodFacing Human SufferingFact and ValueFacts and ValuesFaking ItFalse-Memory Creation in Children and AdultsFat ShameFatal FreedomFellow-Feeling and the Moral LifeFeminism and Its DiscontentsFeminist Ethics and Social and Political PhilosophyFeminist TheoryFinal ExamFirst Do No HarmFirst, Do No HarmFlashpointFlesh WoundsForced to CareForgivenessForgivenessForgiveness and LoveForgiveness and ReconciliationForgiveness and RetributionForgiveness is Really StrangeFoucault and the Government of DisabilityFoundational Issues in Human Brain MappingFoundations of Forensic Mental Health AssessmentFree WillFree Will And Moral ResponsibilityFree Will and Reactive AttitudesFree Will, Agency, and Meaning in LifeFree?Freedom and ValueFreedom vs. InterventionFriendshipFrom Darwin to HitlerFrom Disgust to HumanityFrom Enlightenment to ReceptivityFrom Morality to Mental HealthFrom Silence to VoiceFrom Valuing to ValueFrontiers of JusticeGender in the MirrorGenetic PoliticsGenetic ProspectsGenetic ProspectsGenetics of Original SinGenetics of Original SinGenocide's AftermathGetting RealGluttonyGood WorkGoodness & AdviceGreedGroups in ConflictGrowing Up GirlGut FeminismHabilitation, Health, and AgencyHandbook for Health Care Ethics CommitteesHandbook of BioethicsHandbook of Children's RightsHandbook of PsychopathyHappinessHappiness and the Good LifeHappiness Is OverratedHard FeelingsHard LuckHardwired BehaviorHarmful ThoughtsHeal & ForgiveHealing PsychiatryHealth Care Ethics for PsychologistsHeterosyncraciesHistorical and Philosophical Perspectives on Biomedical EthicsHoly WarHookedHookedHow Can I Be Trusted?How Propaganda WorksHow to Do Things with Pornography How to Make Opportunity EqualHow Universities Can Help Create a Wiser WorldHow We HopeHow We Think About DementiaHuman BondingHuman Dignity and Assisted DeathHuman EnhancementHuman GoodnessHuman Identity and BioethicsHuman TrialsHumanism, What's That?Humanitarian ReasonHumanityHumanizing MadnessI am Not Sick I Don't Need Help!I Was WrongIdentifying Hyperactive ChildrenIf That Ever Happens to MeImproving Nature?In Defense of FloggingIn Defense of SinIn Love With LifeIn Our Own ImageIn the FamilyIn the Land of the DeafIn the Name of IdentityIn the Wake of 9/11In Two MindsInclusive EthicsInformed Consent in Medical ResearchInnovation in Medical TechnologyInside Assisted LivingInside EthicsIntelligence, Race, and GeneticsIntensive CareInto the Gray ZoneIs Human Nature Obsolete?Is Long-Term Therapy Unethical?Is There a Duty to Die?Is There an Ethicist in the House?Issues in Philosophical CounselingJudging Children As ChildrenJust a DogJust BabiesJust CareJustice for ChildrenJustice for HedgehogsJustice in RobesJustice, Luck, and KnowledgeJustifiable ConductKant on Moral AutonomyKant's Theory of VirtueKids of CharacterKilling McVeighLack of CharacterLack of CharacterLaw and the BrainLearning About School ViolenceLearning from Baby PLeaving YouLectures on the History of Political PhilosophyLegal and Ethical Aspects of HealthcareLegal Aspects of Mental CapacityLegal ConceptionsLegal InsanityLegalizing ProstitutionLet Them Eat ProzacLevelling the Playing FieldLiberal Education in a Knowledge SocietyLiberal EugenicsLife After FaithLife at the BottomLife, Sex, and IdeasListening to the WhispersLiving ProfessionalismLosing Matt ShepardLostLuckyMad in AmericaMad PrideMadhouseMaking Another World PossibleMaking Babies, Making FamiliesMaking Genes, Making WavesMaking Sense of Freedom and ResponsibilityMalignantMasculinity Studies and Feminist TheoryMeaning and Moral OrderMeaning in LifeMeaning in Life and Why It MattersMeans, Ends, and PersonsMeans, Ends, and PersonsMedical Enhancement and PosthumanityMedical Research for HireMedicalized MasculinitiesMedically Assisted DeathMeditations for the HumanistMelancholia and MoralismMental Health Professionals, Minorities and the PoorMental Illness, Medicine and LawMerit, Meaning, and Human BondageMetaethical SubjectivismMill's UtilitarianismMind FieldsMind WarsMind WarsModern Theories of JusticeModernity and TechnologyMoney ShotMonsterMoral Acquaintances and Moral DecisionsMoral BrainsMoral ClarityMoral CultivationMoral Development and RealityMoral Dilemmas in Real LifeMoral DimensionsMoral EntanglementsMoral FailureMoral LiteracyMoral MachinesMoral MindsMoral OriginsMoral Panics, Sex PanicsMoral ParticularismMoral PerceptionMoral PsychologyMoral Psychology: Volume IVMoral RealismMoral RelativismMoral RepairMoral Responsibility and Alternative PossibilitiesMoral Status and Human LifeMoral StealthMoral Theory at the MoviesMoral TribesMoral Value and Human DiversityMoral, Immoral, AmoralMoralismMorality and Self-InterestMorality in a Natural WorldMorality, Moral Luck and ResponsibilityMorals, Rights and Practice in the Human ServicesMorals, Rights and Practice in the Human ServicesMore Than HumanMotive and RightnessMovies and the Moral Adventure of LifeMurder in the InnMy Body PoliticMy Brain Made Me Do ItMy Sister's KeeperMy Sister's KeeperMy WayNano-Bio-EthicsNarrative MedicineNarrative ProsthesisNatural Ethical FactsNatural-Born CybogsNaturalized BioethicsNeither Bad nor MadNeoconservatismNeonatal BioethicsNeurobiology and the Development of Human MoralityNeuroethicsNeuroethicsNeuroethicsNew Takes in Film-PhilosophyNew Waves in EthicsNew Waves in MetaethicsNietzsche on Ethics and PoliticsNo Child Left DifferentNo Impact ManNormative EthicsNormativityNothing about us, without us!Oath BetrayedOf War and LawOn ApologyOn Being AuthenticOn EvilOn Human RightsOn The Stigma Of Mental IllnessOn the TakeOn Virtue EthicsOn What MattersOn What We Owe to Each OtherOne ChildOne Nation Under TherapyOne World NowOne World NowOur Bodies, Whose Property?Our Bodies, Whose Property?Our Daily MedsOur Faithfulness to the PastOur Posthuman FutureOut of EdenOut of Its MindOut of the ShadowsOverdosed AmericaOxford Handbook of Psychiatric EthicsOxford Studies in Normative EthicsOxford Textbook of Philosophy of PsychiatryPassionate DeliberationPatient Autonomy and the Ethics of ResponsibilityPC, M.D.Perfecting VirtuePersonal AutonomyPersonal Autonomy in SocietyPersonal Identity and EthicsPersonalities on the PlatePersonhood and Health CarePersons, Humanity, and the Definition of DeathPerspectives On Health And Human RightsPharmaceutical FreedomPharmacracyPharmageddonPhilosophy and This Actual WorldPhilosophy of BiologyPhilosophy of Technology: The Technological ConditionPhysician-Assisted DyingPicturing DisabilityPilgrim at Tinker CreekPlaying God?Playing God?Political EmotionsPornlandPowerful MedicinesPractical Autonomy and BioethicsPractical EthicsPractical Ethics for PsychologistsPractical RulesPragmatic BioethicsPragmatic BioethicsPragmatic NeuroethicsPraise and BlamePreferences and Well-BeingPrimates and PhilosophersPro-Life, Pro-ChoiceProcreation and ParenthoodProfits Before People?Progress in BioethicsProperty in the BodyProzac As a Way of LifeProzac on the CouchPsychiatric Aspects of Justification, Excuse and Mitigation in Anglo-American Criminal Law Psychiatric EthicsPsychiatry and EmpirePsychological Concepts and Biological PsychiatryPsychology and Consumer CulturePsychology and LawPsychotropic Drug Prescriber's Survival GuidePublic Health LawPublic Health Law and EthicsPublic PhilosophyPunishing the Mentally IllPunishmentPursuits of WisdomPutting Morality Back Into PoliticsPutting on VirtueQuality of Life and Human DifferenceRaceRadical HopeRadical VirtuesRape Is RapeRe-creating MedicineRe-Engineering Philosophy for Limited BeingsReason's GriefReasonably ViciousReckoning With HomelessnessReconceiving Medical EthicsRecovery from SchizophreniaRedefining RapeRedesigning HumansReducing the Stigma of Mental IllnessReflections On How We LiveReframing Disease ContextuallyRefusing CareRefuting Peter Singer's Ethical TheoryRelative JusticeRelativism and Human RightsReligion ExplainedReprogeneticsRescuing JeffreyResponsibilityResponsibility and PsychopathyResponsibility and PunishmentResponsibility and PunishmentResponsibility from the MarginsResponsible GeneticsRethinking CommodificationRethinking Informed Consent in BioethicsRethinking Mental Health and DisorderRethinking RapeReturn to ReasonRevolution in PsychologyRightsRights, Democracy, and Fulfillment in the Era of Identity PoliticsRisk and Luck in Medical EthicsRobert NozickRousseau and the Dilemmas of Modernity Rule of Law, Misrule of MenRun, Spot, RunRunning on RitalinSatisficing and MaximizingSchizophrenia, Culture, and SubjectivityScience and EthicsScience in the Private InterestScience, Policy, and the Value-Free IdealScience, Seeds and CyborgsScratching the Surface of BioethicsSecular Philosophy and the Religious TemperamentSeeing the LightSelf-ConstitutionSelf-Made MadnessSelf-Trust and Reproductive AutonomySentimental RulesSex Fiends, Perverts, and PedophilesSex OffendersSex, Family, and the Culture WarsSexual DevianceSexual EthicsSexual PredatorsSexualized BrainsShaping Our SelvesShock TherapyShould I Medicate My Child?ShunnedSick to Death and Not Going to Take It AnymoreSickoSide EffectsSidewalk StoriesSister CitizenSkeptical FeminismSocial Inclusion of People with Mental IllnessSocial JusticeSociological Perspectives on the New GeneticsSome We Love, Some We Hate, Some We EatSovereign VirtueSpeech MattersSpiral of EntrapmentSplit DecisionsSticks and StonesStories MatterSubhumanSubjectivity and Being SomebodySuffering, Death, and IdentitySuicide ProhibitionSurgery JunkiesSurgically Shaping ChildrenTaking Morality SeriouslyTaming the Troublesome ChildTechnology and the Good Life?TestimonyText and Materials on International Human RightsThe Aims of Higher EducationThe Almost MoonThe Altruistic BrainThe American Psychiatric Publishing Textbook of Forensic PsychiatryThe Animal ManifestoThe Animals' AgendaThe Art of LivingThe Autonomy of MoralityThe Beloved SelfThe Best Things in LifeThe Big FixThe Bioethics ReaderThe Biology and Psychology of Moral AgencyThe Blackwell Guide to Medical EthicsThe Body SilentThe BondThe Book of LifeThe Burden of SympathyThe Cambridge Companion to Virtue EthicsThe Cambridge Companion to Virtue EthicsThe Cambridge Textbook of BioethicsThe Case against Assisted SuicideThe Case Against PerfectionThe Case Against PunishmentThe Case for PerfectionThe Case of Terri SchiavoThe Challenge of Human RightsThe Code for Global EthicsThe Colonization Of Psychic SpaceThe Commercialization of Intimate LifeThe Common ThreadThe Connected SelfThe Constitution of AgencyThe Creation of PsychopharmacologyThe Criminal BrainThe Decency WarsThe Difficult-to-Treat Psychiatric PatientThe Disability PendulumThe Disability Rights Movement: From Charity to ConfrontationThe Domain of ReasonsThe Double-Edged HelixThe Duty to ProtectThe Emotional Construction of MoralsThe End of Ethics in a Technological SocietyThe End of Stigma?The Essentials of New York Mental Health LawThe Ethical BrainThe Ethical Dimensions of the Biological and Health SciencesThe Ethics of BioethicsThe Ethics of Choosing ChildrenThe Ethics of Human EnhancementThe Ethics of ParenthoodThe Ethics of SightseeingThe Ethics of the FamilyThe Ethics of the Family in SenecaThe Ethics of the LieThe Ethics of TransplantsThe Ethics of WarThe Ethics ToolkitThe Evolution of Mental Health LawThe Evolution of MoralityThe FamilyThe Fat Studies ReaderThe Forgiveness ProjectThe Form of Practical KnowledgeThe Fountain of YouthThe Freedom ParadoxThe Future of Assisted Suicide and EuthanasiaThe Future of Human NatureThe Good BookThe Good LifeThe Great BetrayalThe Handbook of Disability StudiesThe Healing VirtuesThe High Price of MaterialismThe History of Human RightsThe HorizonThe Idea of JusticeThe Ideal of NatureThe Illusion of Freedom and EqualityThe Immortal Life of Henrietta LacksThe Importance of Being UnderstoodThe Insanity OffenseThe Joy of SecularismThe Language PoliceThe Last Normal ChildThe Last UtopiaThe Limits of MedicineThe LobotomistThe Love CureThe Lucifer EffectThe Manual of EpictetusThe Mark of ShameThe Meaning of NiceThe Medicalization of SocietyThe Merck DruggernautThe Mind Has MountainsThe Modern Art of DyingThe Modern SavageThe Moral ArcThe Moral BrainThe Moral Demands of MemoryThe Moral FoolThe Moral MindThe Moral Psychology HandbookThe Moral, Social, and Commercial Imperatives of Genetic Testing and ScreeningThe Most Good You Can DoThe Myth of ChoiceThe Myth of the Moral BrainThe Nature of NormativityThe New Disability HistoryThe New Genetic MedicineThe New Religious IntoleranceThe Offensive InternetThe Origins of FairnessThe Oxford Handbook of Animal EthicsThe Oxford Handbook of Ethics at the End of LifeThe Perfect BabyThe Philosophical ParentThe Philosophy of NeedThe Philosophy of PornographyThe Philosophy of PsychiatryThe Politics Of LustThe Portable Ethicist for Mental Health Professionals The Power of Religion in the Public SphereThe Price of PerfectionThe Price of TruthThe Problem of PunishmentThe Prosthetic ImpulseThe Psychology of Good and EvilThe Psychology of Good and EvilThe PsychopathThe Purity MythThe Pursuit of PerfectionThe Relevance of Philosophy to LifeThe Right Road to Radical FreedomThe Right to Be ParentsThe Righteous MindThe Root of All EvilThe Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Animal MindsThe Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of EmpathyThe Rules of InsanityThe Second SexismThe Second-Person StandpointThe Silent World of Doctor and PatientThe Sleep of ReasonThe Social Psychology of Good and EvilThe Social Psychology of MoralityThe Social Psychology of MoralityThe Speed of DarkThe Stem Cell ControversyThe Stem Cell ControversyThe Story of Cruel and UnusualThe Story WithinThe Stubborn System of Moral ResponsibilityThe Suicide TouristThe Terrible GiftThe Theory of OptionsThe Therapy of DesireThe Trauma of Psychological TortureThe Trauma of Psychological TortureThe Triple HelixThe Trolley Problem MysteriesThe Trouble with DiversityThe Truth About the Drug CompaniesThe Ugly LawsThe Varieties of Religious ExperienceThe Virtue of Defiance and Psychiatric EngagementThe Virtues of FreedomThe Virtues of HappinessThe Virtuous Life in Greek EthicsThe Virtuous PsychiatristThe Voice of Breast Cancer in Medicine and BioethicsThe War Against BoysThe War for Children's MindsThe Whole ChildThe Woman RacketThe Worldwide Practice of TortureTherapy with ChildrenThieves of VirtueThree Generations, No ImbecilesTimes of Triumph, Times of DoubtTolerance Among The VirtuesTolerance and the Ethical LifeTolerationToxic PsychiatryTrauma, Truth and ReconciliationTreatment Kind and FairTrusting on the EdgeTry to RememberUltimate JudgementUnborn in the USA: Inside the War on AbortionUndermining ScienceUnderstanding AbortionUnderstanding CloningUnderstanding EmotionsUnderstanding EvilUnderstanding Kant's EthicsUnderstanding Moral ObligationUnderstanding Physician-Pharmaceutical Industry InteractionsUnderstanding TerrorismUnderstanding the GenomeUnderstanding the Stigma of Mental IllnessUnderstanding Treatment Without ConsentUnhingedUnprincipled VirtueUnsanctifying Human Life: Essays on EthicsUnspeakable Acts, Ordinary PeopleUp in FlamesUpheavals of ThoughtUsers and Abusers of PsychiatryValue-Free Science?Values and Psychiatric DiagnosisValues in ConflictVegetarianismViolence and Mental DisorderVirtue EthicsVirtue, Rules, and JusticeVirtue, Vice, and PersonalityVirtues and Their VicesVoracious Science and Vulnerable AnimalsVulnerability, Autonomy, and Applied EthicsWar Against the WeakWar, Torture and TerrorismWarrior's DishonourWeaknessWelfare and Rational CareWhat Genes Can't DoWhat Have We DoneWhat Is a Human?What Is Good and WhyWhat Is Good and WhyWhat Is the Good Life?What Price Better Health?What Should I Do?What We Owe to Each OtherWhat Would Aristotle Do?What's Good on TVWhat's Normal?What's Wrong with Children's RightsWhat's Wrong with Homosexuality?What's Wrong With Morality?When Is Discrimination Wrong?Who Holds the Moral High Ground?Who Owns YouWho Qualifies for Rights?Whose America?Whose View of Life?Why Animals MatterWhy Animals MatterWhy I Burned My Book and Other Essays on DisabilityWhy Not Kill Them All?Why Punish? How Much?Why Some Things Should Not Be for SaleWisdom, Intuition and EthicsWithout ConscienceWomen and Borderline Personality DisorderWomen and MadnessWondergenesWould You Kill the Fat Man?Wrestling with Behavioral GeneticsWriting About PatientsYou Must Be DreamingYour Genetic DestinyYour Inner FishYouth Offending and Youth Justice Yuck!
There are some cases in which it seems impermissible to defensively harm or kill a number of persons each of whom is liable to be harmed or killed. Suppose that in a war against ISIS in Syria in order to save the life of one trapped soldier, the soldier himself or his colleague has to kill one thousand culpable aggressors. It seems that the number of aggressors who must be killed or harmed to save the life of our soldier can make a difference to the permissibility of defensive action. According to traditional Just War theory killing of liable combatants can never be disproportionate and so there would be no limit to the number of culpable aggressors one permits to kill to save the life of a soldier whom will be killed by the aggressors otherwise. David Rodin in "The Lesser Evil Obligation", argues that it would definitely be impermissible to kill, for example one million culpable and liable aggressors to defend one innocent child (p. 35). "When the number of aggressors in sufficiently large, the number of even fully culpable aggressors who must be killed can be relevant to the all-considered permissibility of defensive action" (p.35). He justifies his intuition by appealing to the lesser evil obligation theory, according to which a right bearer has an all-things-considered obligation not to exercise her own rights. In the above-mentioned example the right of the soldier to kill all thousand culpable combatants has not been expunged or dismissed or forfeited but according to the lesser evil obligation that right has been subsumed by sufficient independent morally outweighing considerations. Killing so many aggressors would "inflict considerable harm on the very large number of persons who love and depend on them. When this incidental harm is sufficiently great, it plausibly outweighs the liberty right of a putative defender to kill all the aggressors" (p.36).
Contra Rodin's consequentialist approach, McMahan argues that beneficence cannot override deontic concept of liability. According to him there is a liability justification for killing each of the thousand culpable killers, in the above-mentioned example. By analyzing the concept of liability he tries to show that effectiveness, narrow proportionality (proportionality in harms to those who are liable to some degree of harm), and necessity are internal circumstantial conditions of liability rather than external conditions of permissibility of action (p.17). Through this nuanced definition of liability which helps him to embed different concepts proportionality in the aggregate manner, he tries to distinguish between the liability of culpable aggressor and of responsible killer (a fast driver for example) who only through sheer chance now is threatening the life of an innocent bystander. To define the liability we need to look not only at the responsibility of the agent but also to the other internal parameters like effectiveness and narrow proportionality. So Mc Mahan thinks that even it is permissible to kill one responsible killer in a fast driver case, as proportionality in the aggregate suggests, if effectiveness and narrow proportionality are circumstantial and internal conditions of liability rather that external conditions of permissibility, none of the thousand culpable killers is liable to be killed (p.24). One hardly can avoid the objection of adhocness when reflecting on McMahan's maneuver in order to explain our intuition that the number of killed aggressors matters. What is exactly the difference his sophisticated account of proportionality in the aggregate in considering liability justification and simple account of lesser evil obligation which Rodin has supported? Both of them can handle the number of killers problem as well as the intuition that permissibility is not a linear function of liability, however, McMahan's account seems not successful in explaining how could effectiveness as a utilitarian concept can be reconciled with justificatory priority of liability.
McMahan thinks that Rodin's account of lesser evil obligation cannot distinguish between liability of minimally responsible and culpable killers, since his account is consistent with harming an innocent person and leaving free the culpable aggressors. In response Rodin suggests the distinction between the liability to be harmed and the impersonal badness of harming. According to this distinction, liability is not the mere consideration relevant to the weighing of harm. So "dismissed responsibility may mitigate impersonal badness, without necessary eliminating liability to defensive harm" (p.39). Anyway, Rodin-McMahan debate in the two first chapters of the book provides a fresh and thought provoking entrance.
Larry Mayin his seminal paper titled 'Human Rights, Proportionality, and the Lives of Soldiers' insists on the important impact which taking human rights law seriously will have on the current debate in Just War theory. International human rights law in contrast to international humanitarian law does not allow forfeiting the rights of life, liberty and security of persons. "In times of emergency that the very essence of the State is jeopardized, there can be derogation of some of the rights guaranteed by the Convention, although not the right to life" (p.47-8). This view towards the life of persons should be expanded not only to the lives of noncombatant civilians but also to the lives of even enemy soldiers in any supposed just war. If we take human rights perspective more seriously even the rights of enemy soldiers cannot be dismissed and their lives should be calculated in proportionality assessments as well (p.59). May argues that both necessity and proportionality constraints have to be met in order for the war participants to be justified in attacking soldiers with lethal force. Despite the fact that May's proposal for intruding human rights concerns into humanitarian law of war is attention worthy it seems that his view leads us to accept a sort of pacifism (Contingent pacifism), a view acceptance of which seems difficult for people who like us are currently under threat of ISIS militants.
Contra May whose view leads to contingent pacifism Richard Arneson opposed pacifism as a deeply troubling view which may bring about "catastrophic levels of human rights violations" in the real-world wars (p.69). However for one who like McMahan tries to proportionate the liability to harm with responsibility and does not accept contingent pacifism, it would be difficult to escape from responsibility dilemma which demonstrates that either the threshold of responsibility is so high that neither combatants nor non-combatants are responsible agents and so we have to accept pacifism, or, the standard threshold of responsibility ascription is so low that we could not even distinguish between liability of combatants to be killed and somehow war-supporters responsible non-combatants. Dealing with this sort of dilemma is the challenge of Arneson's paper. He accepts that both combatants and non-combatants can be permissible object of harmful attack. Since noncombatants can fail to fulfill their moral duties and responsibilities based on which they may become morally culpable and liable to harm (p.72). However it seems that would have dangerous consequences. Arneson claims that it would be morally permissible for guerilla fighters who are engaging in a just war against a tyranny to take civilians as their shelter (p.73). It means that if our aim is good, we ought to reach that aim without caring the way or the means to that aim. This view may ultimately result in justifying terrorism. We all know that not all terrorist groups aim at wrong goals, what is absolutely bad about them is their means toward their goal.
So I think that no good goal is able to sufficiently justify any means or even any necessary means toward it. And we ought to check the permissibility of choosing our means as well. Now consider a case in which one who is under duress, in order to save her own life is obliged to kill 70 innocent people. Victor Tadros reflects on this real case and tries to show that duress can provide a sort of justifying defense to a charge of murdering for the mentioned killer. The idea that duress sometimes justifies protanto wrong doing faces with at least three kinds of objections. First, a person who kills under duress would treat her victim as a means to save his own or others lives. Second, the fact that a person is already under lethal attack cannot provide a reason for others to treat him as a means. So the mentioned killer cannot justify his action by appealing to the reason that 'if I haven't killed him they would definitely kill me and him'. Third, treating people as a means is bad not only in cases in which the goal is egoistic or opportunistic (that reaches a good effect), but also in cases where the goal is impartial or eliminative (that diminishes some bad effects). All of these objections have been challenged by Tadros (pp.101-14). Nevertheless, despite Tadros endeavors, it seems to me that duress cannot have a justifying role for wrong doing and it can only provide a sort of excuse for wrong doing. In addition to that, it seems that Tadros' account can be stated more easily Through Rodin's account of lesser evil justification, for Tadros uses the same consequentialist parameters for permission of an evil action as Rodin has more clearly done.
While McMahan's central focus was on recent individualist Just War theorizing, Tanguay-Renaud draws our attention to the liability of states as corporate group agents in wars. His main question is that how could corporate liability intelligibly be ascribed to states and "could such corporate liability ever make a difference in an overall argument about the permissibility of attacking a state?" (117.8). With an adequate normative framework or constitution which ensures the group intentional reasonable judgments and activities, we can imagine a irreducible group agency. So we have to distinguish between personal and corporate levels in our moral judgments of responsibility and liability. He argues that states as group agents can have rights and responsibility based on how states relates to individuals' rights. "A state may, for example, have no sovereignty-based complaint against various types of external interferences aimed at thwarting its violations of its individual members' human rights" (pp.26-7). I agree with him, however, we should be completely aware of the bad consequences may external (even justified) attacks have upon individuals, for example look at what have happened in Lybia after tackling Ghazafi. Tanguay-Renaud considers this latter point and says that only in cases where individuals are not at risk of being significantly harmed by the attack on the state, state liability to attack can justify foreign intervention (p.136). We reach to dilemma here: if we accept Tanguay-Renaud argument that state liability is something over and above the liability of individuals then the rights of every individual person in wars against cruel states can be easily forgotten. Because the aim is overthrowing the bad government then the individuals will be sacrificed during these pro-liberty interventions (see what happened in Afghanistan and Iraq after US war). So in nondemocratic states foreign intervention may be so harmful to individuals. On the other hand the state can be supposed to be nothing but the aggregation of individuals only in certain level of democracy. In democratic states individuals have found a strong potential duty and responsibility to control and support the actions of their government. In such democracies the existence of feedback controlling procedures make most state's decisions so reasonable that hardly the state becomes liable to attack to be overthrown. So the concept of state liability to harm or attack seems inapplicable.
Andrew Altman in his paper 'Targeting Al Qaeda' criticizes US policy of targeted killings of Al Qaeda members throughout the middle east and the globe after 9/11 event. He tries to show that the law of armed conflict (LOAC) does provide neither legal nor ethical justifying reason for US forces combatants to be privileged in such an alleged war. In addition to LOAC, the killings would violate international human rights law, if US claims about the right to self-defense in these cases cannot be fully approved (p.154). He also questioned the supposed claim of immanency of the threads posed by Al Qaeda terrorists which necessitates the use of lethal forces in defense of the threat (p.159). I am agree with Altman that US post 9/11 war policies in Iraq and Afghanistan were not morally or legally justifiable however this paper relevance to or importance for the edited book on 'Ethics of War' is not clear for me.
Adel Ahmed Haque argues in favor of the claim that using weapons which are more likely to kill civilians than to kill combatants is morally impermissible and so using such weapons should be considered as unlawfully indiscriminate that according to the law of armed conflicts is prohibited (p.165). In order to show moral impermissibility of the use of weapons of mass destruction Haque appeals to necessity, proportionality, and intentionality criteria for liability to be Hamed. Nevertheless, it would be a proper question to ask what Haque's paper is going to add to the already existing literature on moral considerations about what makes it the case that an agent is all-things-considered justified in transgressing some persons rights, on which Rodin and McMahan have discussed throughly and philosophically. Haque refers to McMahan and Parfit's expectabilism (rule consequentialism) to justify his position (p.176). But, I think in this volume in which Rodin's paper subtly formalizes lesser evil justification and obligation Haque in his paper should consider his account more seriously.
In the well-known trolley problem, remember the scenario in which one pushes a Fat Man staying on the bridge in order to save the lives of five bystanders. Compare this with a case in which one causes a car to fail into the trails and thereby stop the trolley from moving toward five persons, despite the fact that the car driver is in the car. It seems intuitive judgment that in the Car the rescuer does not use the driver as a means, but in the Fat Man the man has been used as a means. Kai Draper denies this intuitive distinction and suggests that we commit distinct between these two typical cases. He continues that more discriminations could not provide any reasonable basis for the legal distinction between harming non-combatants directly and harming them indirectly. He then tries to establish his claim through several examples. Here I want to draw Draper's attention to the distinction Robert Audi has explicated subtly in his book titled Means, Ends, and Persons (OUP 2016). Audi here distinguishes between treating a person merely as a means, treating her solely as a means and treating her as a mere means. In Car the rescuer might tries her best to call the driver to come out of the car but unfortunately there was no time to warn the victim driver. In this case the rescuer use the driver solely as a means since the victim's life is important for the rescuer. Now consider the Car in which the rescuer doesn't pay attention to the life or wellbeing of the victim. In this case the victim is merely used as a means. In Fat Man however, the victim not only has been used merely as a means but also she has been used as a mere means. This is the most morally objectionable case, in comparison with the Car. Through this nuance distinctions I think Draper can sharpen his intuition (p.199), and so there would be no need to come across pragmatic compromise in order to reduce harms.
Mattias Iser in his thought provoking paper tries to develop the basis for a law concerning the justifiability of revolutionary violence. Contra Rodin and Norman who explicitly sees the revolutionary struggle for freedom as peripheral right which could not provide a reason for permissibility of violence, Iser argues that since the autonomy and freewill of agents is their basic constituent, their freedom and autonomous decision making has to be respectfully recognized (p.213). He claims that "all mentioned forms of sever inequality manifest disrespect that may potentially justify violence resistant as a last resort because persons simply do not have to endure living under such conditions" (p.220). Conditions under which second-class citizens are not permitted to shape and construct responsibly and freely the social norms of their communities, provide reason for resistance. And if such uncontrollable conditions become institutionalized and systematized in a governmental law the oppressed people are justified to resort lethal violence against such a bad state. Iser cleverly recognizes the paradoxical fact that revolutionary violence may lead to demonization of opponents of revolution. "As all revolutions show, the indignation that fuels them contains a strong retributive aspect" (p.223). So it can be inferred that overturning an unjust state is rarely a justified option. On the one hand the revolutionists try to reach justice and equality and o the other hand their indignations and retributive rages lead them to see their opponents as a strategic nuisance. If oppressed people have no way other than standing up against injustice, they should know that revolutions may undermine their goal. I enjoy reading Iser's paper and I recommend reading it to all who tries to protest in a revolutionary manner.
Seth Lazar in the first part of his paper tries to shed some lights on the terminologies already popular in the Just War theory debates and shows that categorizations like jus ad bellum, jus in bello, and jus ex bello have limited philosophical significance. He suggests that interplay between Combatant Ethics (which governs the morality of specific actions within the war) and Command Ethics (which governs the morality of war as a whole in a synchronic sense) provides more crucial and philosophically-rich distinction for the morality of war in the analytic debates. He adds that we ought to pay more attention to justifying reasons for and constraints on the actions and operations taken by combatants rather than ad bellum/in bello famous distinction (p.234).
In the second part, Lazar criticizes the silence of contemporary Just War theory on the important role of negotiations in jus in bello and jus ex bello. Negotiation in war time has its own constraints and norms, Lazar enumerates four of them: "good faith" between two sides of the conflict to reach peace, "safe quarter" for the participants during negotiations, "no new rights" expected to be emerged for one party by negotiations, and "compliance" to the reached agreements (pp.238-242). He concludes that instead of adding some Latin into Just War theory, we need to supplement our already existing theory with norms to govern negotiations that leads to wars' ending.
Peter Strawson thinks that our reactive attitudes like resentment, empathy, trust, and hope are constitutive of moral responsibility. When we see a man torturing a child we normally and immediately react to this state and as a responsible agent resist the event to be continued. Our immediate reaction perhaps does not depend on our other beliefs or intentions. One of he main reactive attitudes the construct our moral response to an event is our hope in ourselves and others to be well. Nancy Sherman in her paper focuses on inter personal and intra personal forward-looking hope to build up "healthy moral relationships within self and with others, after war" (p.245). The issue is important specially when we see that post traumatic stresses are vastly familiar among soldiers have come back home after war. Sherman suggests that our finely attuned and rational hope to ourselves and others can bootstrap our own wellbeing.
Despite her projects importance for creation a sense of meaning and purpose in after war therapy, I couldn't see any philosophical significant point in her paper. Her referring to Starwson's idea about the reactive attitudes as the constitutive of moral responsibility is irrelevant to the gist of her paper. Strawson's idea is about the nature of moral responsibility while Sherman focuses on psychological therapy of soldiers after war, through non normative, real and rational hope.
Saba Bazargan-Forward's and Samuel Rickless's edited book on The Ethics of War, is a readable anthology but it is not an authoritative one. The collected essays are not focused on a specific subject matter and it is really difficult for a reader to reconcile between so many divergent ideas. I highly recommend reading Rodin's paper (pp.28-45) in this volume to everyone who concerns the morality of war. Arneson's paper (pp. 67-93) on Responsibility Dilemma is also philosophically significant.
© 2017 Ebrahim Azadegan
Ebrahim Azadegan, Assistant Professor, Department of Philosophy of Science, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran