Principle of Double Effect An action that is good in itself that has two effects--an intended and otherwise not reasonably attainable good effect‚ and an unintended yet foreseen evil effect--is licit‚ provided there is a due proportion between the intended good and the permitted evil. When there is a clash between the two universal norms of "do good" and "avoid evil‚" the question arises as to whether the obligation to avoid evil requires one to abstain from a good action in order to prevent a
Premium Thomas Aquinas KILL Causality
of the Principle of Double Effect According to the principle of double effect‚ it is ethically permissible to perform an act that has both a good effect and a bad effect if all the following conditions are met: 1. The act is good in itself or at least ethically neutral. 2. The good effect is not obtained by means of the bad effect. 3. The bad effect‚ although foreseen‚ is not intended for itself‚ but only permitted. 4. There is a proportionately grave reason for permitting the bad effect.5 An example
Premium Aristotle Roman Catholic Church Thomas Aquinas
better option: longer life with a low quality or a high quality of life with a shorter span. The Double Effect Principle can be used to make a decision in the even of a morally questionable situation. The principle is applied to the situations where a person’s actions have two possible outcomes. An outcome that is potentially good and an outcome that is potentially bad are both possibilities. This principle is applied to the situation where a physician would have to make the decision to administer medication
Free Suffering Pain Death
The Doctrine of Double Effect (DDE) is often invoked to explain the permissibility of an individual’s action that has two outcomes: one where the end result can be foresee and is good‚ the other that can also be foresee and is bad (Goldworth‚ Amnon‚ 2008). In other words‚ this doctrine is used to justify cases such as where doctors give drugs to patients to relieve severe pain (good result) knowing that doing so may shorten their life span (bad result). Under DDE‚ this action is justifiable because
Premium Ethics Morality Law
Doctrine of Double Effect (DDE)‚ proposed by Saint Thomas Aquinas‚ is a valid moral principle. It has been concluded that the DDE is a valid moral principle as it allows one to justify whether an action will cause two diverse effects and whether the effects are permissible. It is crucial to establish the validity of the DDE because it has been applied to defend a significant number of contemporary controversial issues (McIntyre). In order to determine whether the DDE is a valid moral principle‚ the definition
Premium Patient Physician Thomas Aquinas
This in itself is certainly moral and even encouraged. Second‚ in order for the decision to save the mother’s life to be made‚ the bad effect of the decision cannot be avoided if the food is to be achieved.1 Meaning‚ that if the only way to save the mother’s life is to remove the uterus and kill the baby‚ the baby’s death cannot be avoided. Third‚ the bad effect must not be used as a means to achieve the good.1 The death of her baby is not necessary to treat her cancer‚ however‚ the removal of her
Premium Abortion Pregnancy Fetus
The doctrine of the Double-effect states that if something is done for the moral good but also includes morally questionable side-effects‚ it is ethically acceptable to do so providing that these side-effects were not part of the actions original intentions. This includes the foresight of these negative side-effects potentially occurring. This doctrine originates with Thomas Aquinas‚ and his treatment of homicidal self-defense‚ the Summa Theologica. This work states that an action having foreseen
Premium Abortion Pregnancy Morality
Case Assignment: The doctrine of double effect says that the pursuit of good is not as acceptable if the harm that results is intended rather than merely foreseen (Lippert-Rasmussen‚ 2010). To some it is a nonabsolutist moral principle in which as long as significant good resulted from the action‚ it is allowable (Lippert-Ramussen‚ 2010). Scanlon believed that an act that leads to the death of an innocent person can never be justified by the good that results (Lippert-Ramussen‚ 2010). Scanlon’s
Premium Morality Patient Ethics
Alecia Rhines Doctrine of Double Effect Trident University What is the Doctrine of Double Effect? The doctrine of double effect if often invoked to explain the permissibility of an action that causes a serious harm‚ such as the death of a human being‚ as a side effect of promoting good ends. It is claimed that sometimes it is permissible to cause such harm as a side effect of bringing about a good result even though it would not be permissible to cause such harm as a means to bringing about
Premium Morality Ethics English-language films
counter to the Doctrine of Double Effect. In Whitley R. P. Kaufman’s paper‚ “The Doctrine of Double Effect and the Trolley Problem”‚ Kaufman tries to argue against this widely accepted view by a variety of different means throughout the paper. These means range from viewing the Loop case’s unclear determination as a virtue to considering the case to be too complex or “…the Loop case should be dismissed as an anomaly‚ insufficient to call into question the Doctrine of Double Effect.” (Kaufman 22)
Premium Morality Ethics Trolley problem