C-019Rossian Pluralism vs. ConsequentialismConfidence: High
Killing and Letting Die
Foot (1984)
One-Sentence Thesis
Philippa Foot argues that there is a morally relevant distinction between killing and letting die, which is rooted in the concept of agency and the distinction between initiating a harmful sequence of events and not interfering to prevent it.
Argument Outline
- 1Introduction to the moral relevance of the distinction between killing and letting die
- 2Critique of philosophers who argue that there is no moral difference between killing and letting die
- 3Discussion of the concept of agency and its role in determining moral responsibility
- 4Examination of examples that illustrate the moral difference between killing and letting die, such as Rescue I and Rescue II
- 5Analysis of the connection between agency and different types of rights, including rights to non-interference and rights to goods or services
Key Distinctions
Killing vs. letting die
Initiating a harmful sequence of events vs. not interfering to prevent it
Act vs. omission
Negative duty vs. positive duty
Key Terms
Agency
The concept of being the agent of harm that befalls someone else, which is composed of two subsidiary ideas: particular effects as the result of particular sequences, and initiating a harmful sequence of events
Negative duty
The duty not to interfere with someone's rights or well-being
Positive duty
The duty to provide goods or services to someone
Flashcards
17 cardsRelated Questions
4
Which of the following does Foot responds to in "Killing and Letting Die"?
3
In Foot's "Killing and Letting Die", Foot criticizes which of the following?
4
Which of the following does Foot contrasts with in "Killing and Letting Die"?
3
In Foot's "Killing and Letting Die", Anscombe mentions which of the following?
3
In Foot's "Killing and Letting Die", Thomson supports which of the following?
3
Which of the following is a key distinction in Philippa Foot's essay 'Killing and Letting Die'?