The Metaphysics of Harm

Hanser, Matthew

doi:10.1111/j.1933-1592.2008.00197.x

Cited by 80 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…But seeHanser (2008) for a critique of state-based accounts of harm. See alsoThomson (2011).Assessing Baselines for Identifying Harm: Tricky Cases……”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessing Baselines for Identifying Harm: Tricky Cases and Childhood

Jonas

2015

Res Publica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Baselines are commonly used to enable harm identification. The temporal, the counterfactual and the duty-based normative baselines are the most prominent. Each of these captures an aspect of common conceptions of what it is to harm and be harmed. However, each baseline also fails to deliver workable identifications of harm when presented with certain types of case. Problematic cases are found readily in childhood, a venue in which harm identification is often called for. Without a reliable means of identifying harm in childhood, harm cannot properly play a central role in normative assessments of parental practices and state intervention. This paper presents childhood cases in which the prominent baselines fail and offers an alternative: the interest-based normative baseline. Should the interestbased normative baseline replace its rivals and reign supreme? I argue not, presenting a case for maintaining a suite of baselines for use in varying contexts.Keywords Harm Á Children Á Childhood interests Á Temporal baseline Á Counterfactual baseline Normative assessments of actions, policies and practices are almost invariably influenced by considerations of harm, and in particular, of harm to others. That an action may result in harm usually counts as a reason against it. That an action is unlikely to result in harm can be a reason to permit it. The place that harm occupies in normative reasoning varies according to theoretical standpoint and contextual factors, but variations occur against a stable background of harm's normative resonance. In fact, it is difficult to imagine what normative assessments would be like, were harm to be extirpated from our conceptual framework.

show abstract

“…But seeHanser (2008) for a critique of state-based accounts of harm. See alsoThomson (2011).Assessing Baselines for Identifying Harm: Tricky Cases……”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…170-172). Hanser uses the term 'temporal baseline'(Hanser 2008;Thomson 2011).Assessing Baselines for Identifying Harm: Tricky Cases……”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing Baselines for Identifying Harm: Tricky Cases and Childhood

Jonas

2015

Res Publica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hanser 2008) in this paper we will adopt Feinberg's (1984) notion of harm, which states that harming someone is wrongfully setting back their interests. Here, setting back an interest means putting it in a worse condition than it would otherwise have been in.…”

Section: When Is a Change A Harm?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating irreversible social harms

Pols

Romijn

2017

Policy Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we investigate how irreversible social harms should be evaluated from an ethical perspective. First, we define a general notion of irreversibility, drawing on discussions in ecology and economics. This notion is relational in the sense that ''irreversibility'' is always ''irreversibility for a certain party''. We also note that a change may be more or less difficult to reverse, with full reversibility and irreversibility as two extremes. Second, we examine what can make an irreversible change a harm, and why these kinds of harms have particular ethical significance. Here we draw on discussions from ethics, particularly regarding the capability approach. We also show how our notion of irreversibility connects to, and can add to, discussions in the fields of development studies and disaster management, particularly on the concept of resilience. Third, we suggest how potentially irreversible harms can be recognised and dealt with in policymaking. Finally, we show how our framework can be applied by evaluating the land acquisition process of two biofuel producers in Tanzania.

show abstract

“…I will also argue that his defence highlights the fact that these problems both stem from the same limitation, namely that the counterfactual comparative account cannot accommodate the well-being considerations that inevitably play a role in our judgements on the occurrence of harm. Ironically, this claim undermines one of the main reasons why For useful overviews of other prominent conceptions of harm, see Hanser (2008;2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is some debate in the literature as to whether or not definitions of harm should focus on events or states of affairs (Hanser 2008;Thomson 2011). In this paper, I shall assume that harm pertains to events (as do Hanna and Bradley).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Harm: The counterfactual comparative account, the omission and pre-emption problems, and well-being

Villiers-Botha

2018

South African Journal of Philosophy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Metaphysics of Harm

Cited by 80 publications

References 7 publications

Assessing Baselines for Identifying Harm: Tricky Cases and Childhood

Assessing Baselines for Identifying Harm: Tricky Cases and Childhood

Evaluating irreversible social harms

Harm: The counterfactual comparative account, the omission and pre-emption problems, and well-being

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About