496 records matched your query
03016aam a2200373Ii 4500 001 DBCEC8F4FDB011E7BCC604F996128E48 003 SILO 005 20180120010217 008 140704s2015 enk b 001 0 eng d 020 $a 0199683646 020 $a 9780199683642 035 $a (OCoLC)906537232 040 $a NhCcYBP $b eng $e rda $c N15 $d OCLCO $d COO $d JHE $d IJ5 $d VVC $d ERASA $d BDX $d BTCTA $d UKMGB $d CDX $d YDXCP $d OCLCF $d OCLCQ $d UtOrBLW $d SILO 050 4 $a B105.A35 $b W66 2015 $0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/classification/B1-B5802 082 04 $a 170 $2 23 100 1 $a Woollard, Fiona, $e author. $0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/no2015058505 245 10 $a Doing and allowing harm / $c Fiona Woollard. 250 $a First edition. 264 1 $a Oxford : $b Oxford University Press, $c 2015. 300 $a 239 pages ; $c 24 cm 504 $a Includes bibliographical references (pages 227-231) and indexes. 505 0 $a Analysis of the doing/allowing distinction -- Defence of the doctrine of doing and allowing -- Obligations to aid -- General ethical theories and the doctine of doing and allowing. 520 8 $a Doing harm seems much harder to justify than merely allowing harm. If a boulder is rushing towards Bob, you may refuse to save Bob's life by driving your car into the path of the boulder if doing so would cost you your own life. You may not push the boulder towards Bob to save your own life. This principle-the Doctrine of Doing and Allowing-requires defence. Does the distinction between doing and allowing fall apart under scrutiny? When lives are at stake, how can it matter whether harm is done or allowed? Drawing on detailed analysis of the distinction between doing and allowing, Fiona Woollard argues that the Doctrine of Doing and Allowing is best understood as a principle that protects us from harmful imposition. Such protection against imposition is necessary for morality to recognize anything as genuinely belonging to a person, even that person's own body. As morality must recognize each person's body as belonging to her, the Doctrine of Doing and Allowing should be accepted. Woollard defends a moderate account of our obligations to aid, tackling arguments by Peter Singer and Peter Unger that we must give most of our money away and arguments from Robert Nozick that obligations to aid are incompatible with self-ownership. 650 0 $a Act (Philosophy) $0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh85000677 650 0 $a Good and evil. $0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh85055872 650 0 $a Duty. $0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh85040146 650 0 $a Ethics. $0 http://id.loc.gov/authorities/subjects/sh85045096 650 7 $a Act (Philosophy) $2 fast $0 (OCoLC)fst00796122 650 7 $a Duty. $2 fast $0 (OCoLC)fst00899897 650 7 $a Ethics. $2 fast $0 (OCoLC)fst00915833 650 7 $a Good and evil. $2 fast $0 (OCoLC)fst00944894 941 $a 1 952 $l OVUX522 $d 20191214012422.0 956 $a http://locator.silo.lib.ia.us/search.cgi?index_0=id&term_0=DBCEC8F4FDB011E7BCC604F996128E48Initiate Another SILO Locator Search