Doctrine Of Acts And Omissions Research Paper

568 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Personal accountability and responsibility

Suppose something happens that it was within your power to prevent? If you didn’t have malicious intent, was it still you fault? Does letting someone die when you know you had the capability of saving them in turn make you a murderer? All of these are questions that philosophical thinkers have tried to answer for centuries. The Doctrine of Acts and Omissions holds that it is morally worse to commit an act that brings about a bad event than it would be merely to allow the event to take place by not doing anything to prevent its occurrence. In essence, there is an intrinsic moral difference between acting and the failure to act. In some ways, we bear more responsibility for what comes about as a result of our doing something than for what comes about as a result of our allowing it to happen. A proponent of the Doctrine of Acts and Omissions would say than in certain circumstances, killing is morally worse than letting die. Failing to give aid to someone bleeding out from an accidental amputation is no doubt bad, but surely not as bad as cutting their arm off in the first place. I f...

Show More
Related

  • The Quartering Act Essay

    999 Words  | 2 Pages

    For a colony of the British government to rebel against the large, wealthy English country needed to take an extreme amount of resentment towards that group. The British themselves caused this resentment towards the English government. Act passes by the government caused this feeling; these acts began with the quartering acts of 1765. The quartering act of 1765 confirmed the colonist’s need for an independent, free nation because of subjugation of the colonists by the English government. This subjugation spurred a movement that ended in revolution.

    Read More

  • Jury Nullification: Power, Impact and Controversy

    1444 Words  | 3 Pages

    At trial, your life is in the palms of strangers who decide your fate to walk free or be sentenced and charged with a crime. Juries and judges are the main components of trials and differ at both the state and federal level. A respectable citizen selected for jury duty can determine whether the evidence presented was doubtfully valid enough to convict someone without full knowledge of the criminal justice system or the elements of a trial. In this paper, juries and their powers will be analyzed, relevant cases pertaining to jury nullification will be expanded and evaluated, the media’s part on juries discretion, and finally the instructions judges give or may not include for juries in the court.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of The Ways We Lie

    1035 Words  | 3 Pages

    For every action there is a consequence. In, “The Ways We Lie,” by Stephanie Ericsson she quotes, “We must consider the meaning of our actions”

    Read More

  • Trolley Case Study

    1060 Words  | 3 Pages

    In the former choice, we decide to turn the trolley to save five, but kill one. Warren S. Quinn argues that “if our action is a certain kind of withdrawing of aid, it naturally enough seems to count as negative agency” (Quinn 303). The purpose of this choice is not to kill the lives of five. Actually, we have to kill the life of one, but it seems to be the failure to save one. This decision comes from negative agency. On the other hand, the later choice is decide to allow to kill five, but save one. According to Quinn, “negative agency would include the foreseeably harmful inactions that could not or need not have been avoided” (Quinn 292). The purpose of this choice is not to kill the life of one. The consequence that the lives of five is killed also seems to the failure to save them. This choice also comes from negative agency. In this case, we can’t avoid to sacrifice either the lives of five or the life of one. Moreover, this is the conflict between the agencies which have the same nature. Therefore, we can compare the moral values of the two choices by the amount of the sacrifice. As a result, we are morally permitted to turn the trolley in order to save the lives of five, but kill one in this

    Read More

  • Fifth Amendment Essay

    1021 Words  | 3 Pages

    The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides, "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury…nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property… nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation"(Cornell). The clauses within the Fifth Amendment outline constitutional limits on police procedure. Within them there is protection against self-incrimination, it protects defendants from having to testify if they may incriminate themselves through the testimony. A witness may plead the fifth and not answer to any questioning if they believe it can hurt them (Cornell). The Bill of Rights, which consists of the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution, enumerates certain basic personal liberties. Laws passed by elected officials that infringe on these liberties are invalidated by the judiciary as unconstitutional. The Fifth Amendment was ratified in 1791; the Framers of the Fifth Amendment intended that its revisions would apply only to the actions of the federal government. After the Fourteenth was ratified, most of the Fifth Amendment's protections were made applicable to the states. Under the Incorporation Doctrine, most of the liberties set forth in the Bill of Rights were made applicable to state governments through the U.S. Supreme Court's interpretation of the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment (Burton, 2007).

    Read More

  • Greatest Happiness Principle Essay

    1079 Words  | 3 Pages

    Within those consequences, the most important factor is the level of happiness. This is labeled as the Greatest Happiness Principle. The principle states that a person should always act in order to yield the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. There is argument over the importance of quantity of happiness versus the quality of that happiness and the sources of these pleasures however this doesn’t necessarily effect this debate. This is because in order to have a definitive answer the man must qualify for both. The defining factor according to these ideals is whether or not the man by whatever means, causes a larger amount of pain and less happiness in both quality and quantity while alive than he would if he killed himself. If it is true that his life does not benefit the aggregate happiness of people then in the consequentialist view it would be permissible and morally acceptable for the man to kill

    Read More

  • The Ethical Theory Of Utilitarianism

    1194 Words  | 3 Pages

    In the most extreme of situations, it demands the weaker person to be scarified for the greater good. Its principles, therefore, are characterized by two elements, happiness and consequentialism (Utilitarianphilosophy, 2010). These principles of utilitarianism can be applied to either particular actions or general rules, with the latter being referred to rule utilitarianism, and the former act utilitarianism (Cavalier, 1996). Harsanyi (1985, 115) states that ‘’act utilitarianism is the theory that a morally right action is one that in the existing situations will produce the highest expected social utility’’, thus it is about determining what actions brings the best results or the least amount of bad results. An example of such an act would be the assassination of a political figure, i.e. John Fitzgerald Kennedy or Martin Luther King. Rule utilitarianism, on the other hand, is ‘’the theory that a morally right action is simply an action conforming to the correct moral rule applicable to the existing situation’’ (Harsanyi 1985, 115). Thus rule utilitarianism looks at the

    Read More

  • Assault Battery And Crime Essay

    1113 Words  | 3 Pages

    causing another person harm or loss. In my essay, I will analyze different scenarios and focus on

    Read More

  • Utilitarianism

    1254 Words  | 3 Pages

    Act-utilitarianism is a theory suggesting that actions are right if their utility or product is at least as great as anything else that could be done in the situation or circumstance. Despite Mill's conviction that act-utilitarianism is an acceptable and satisfying moral theory there are recognized problems. The main objection to act-utilitarianism is that it seems to be too permissive, capable of justifying any crime, and even making it morally obligatory to do so. This theory gives rise to the i...

    Read More

  • The Difference Between Killing And Letting Die

    988 Words  | 2 Pages

    590). Therefore, Nesbitt claims there is a moral difference between killing and letting die. Nesbitt argues the difference thesis: that killing is morally worse then simply letting someone die (Nesbitt, p. 590). Nesbitt uses claims against Rachels to argue that in fact that killing is worse than letting die. Nesbitt states, "It would be generally accepted, I think, quite independently of the present debate, that someone who is fully prepared to perform a reprehensible action, in the expectation of certain circumstances, but does not do so because the expected circumstances do not eventuate, is just as reprehensible as someone who actually performs that action in those circumstances" (Nesbitt, p. 591). With this being said, someone who is prepared to do a wrong action in expectations of something, but does not do so because the expectations do not occur as a result is just as wrong as someone that performs the wrong action. Yet, Nesbitt claims that this does not provide strong enough evidence that letting someone die is as blameworthy as killing someone. Lastly Nesbitt states, "[W]hich is to say that killing is indeed morally worse than letting die" (Nesbitt, p. 593). Altogether, Nesbitt opposes that there is no moral differences between killing someone and letting

    Read More

  • The Concept of Rational Anarchism

    725 Words  | 2 Pages

    There are some cases where I am for this idea and there are some cases were I am against it. I believe that people are responsible for their actions but not all of them. They may be responsible for their actions but it wasn't their choice to carry out the action. Ultimately, the responsibility is theirs. If you were a pilot that carried nukes and the army demanded you to drop the bomb on a defenseless village. If you had a family back home that was living off your pay check and you decided not to bomb the target, your whole family would have to pay for what you thought was the right thing to do. What would the right choice be? To let your family suffer because you thought is it was wrong to bomb a certain place? This is like making someone choose between one form of torture or another, it doesn't really matter which one you pick, you get hurt somehow in the end. Another example is when you don't know that what you doing is wrong. Say you grew up on a different planet were it was acceptable to kill the weak people who had deformities. If you were to relocate to another place were it was wrong to kill the weak and you kill a person the first day you get there before you learn anything about any laws or anything. Would that person be responsible for their actions? He wouldn't the faintest idea of the laws in his new environment. It could have been just his natural instincts telling him to do what he does at home. I would think that was no one's fault.

    Read More

  • Proclivity For Survival

    632 Words  | 2 Pages

    This propensity for survival does not necessarily manifest itself in the most positive ways in some cases. In fact, the human will to live can, in extreme situations, override a person’s conscience and guilt. In Arthur Miller’s Incident at Vichy, several of the characters experience this phenomenon. Marchand, for example, buys his freedom and therefore his survival without showing any empathy for his peers unable to do this themselves. Worse yet, Leduc feels guilty when he takes Von Berg’s white ticket because he knows it means Von Berg is trading his own life for Leduc’s. Yet, Leduc ignores this guilt and leaves. His sheer will to survive allows him to not only indirectly end the life of another human but also totally ignore the natural guilt he feels about it.

    Read More

  • Duane Murphy's Law Essay

    490 Words  | 1 Pages

    Duane Murphy was introduced to the world of FRC in 2004, when his daughter’s elementary school principal recommended he come and visit Team 701. The RoboVikes have cherished him, as a mentor, ever since. He has been many things to the team: a programming advisor, lead mentor, treasurer, but above all, a father figure to all of the students. The team is made up of strong people with even stronger opinions, inciting many arguments, but the family is so tightly knit that these faze no one. Murphy excels at not allowing these disputes to go too far, after all, it has been his job for over a decade. He knows when to spur the conversation forward and when to put the brakes on. John Wooden’s quote,“Whatever you do in life, surround yourself

    Read More

  • Law And Morality Essay

    1124 Words  | 3 Pages

    Should the aim of law be primarily focused on the protection of individual liberty or, instead, the normative goals aimed at the good of the society? The question of law and morality is difficult mainly because it needs to be addressed with current social conditions that exist, the morals and values that the particular society has. In general, the laws in any society should not only be focused on regulations, but it should also protect individual’s liberty. Devlin debate was based on deciding whether law should enforce morality. He debated about what the law ought to be and whether morality should be enforced by law to form a good society. Furthermore, John Stewart Mill did not write specifically on law and morality. His argument constituted mainly on the anti-enforcers side of law and morality because he believed in individual liberty. John Stuart Mill's assertion that the only justification for limiting one person's liberty is to prevent harm to another

    Read More

  • The Moral Side Of Murder Essay

    787 Words  | 2 Pages

    It does not matter if the greatest, or the least "good" would result from such an act. I hold to the belief that all human beings are intrinsically valuable. This is due to the fact that I, as a Christian, believe that all humans are created in the image of God. But before we go too far we must first accurately define our terms. Murder is always wrong, but it is not always wrong to kill. These two concepts are different. Part of the problem I had with the professor and his hypothetical stories was that he never even discussed the possibility that murder and killing were two different things. The fact is that even our judicial system makes such distinctions when they decide between, what is called murder and manslaughter. "Manslaughter is an unlawful killing that doesn’t involve malice aforethought—intent to seriously harm or kill, or extreme, reckless disregard for life. The absence of malice aforethought means that manslaughter involves less moral blame than either first or second degree murder.” (Berman) Murder on the other hand is defined as "the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought.” (Merriam-Webster’s collegiate dictionary. (Eleventh ed.).,

    Read More

More about Doctrine Of Acts And Omissions Research Paper

Open Document