Theoretical Motivation of “Ought Implies Can”

Buckwalter, Wesley

doi:10.1007/s11406-019-00083-7

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Ngosso International Journal for Equity in Health (2023) 22: 5The Potential Ability Argument (PAA) is a version of the 'ought implies can' principle. The idea that 'ought implies can' suggests, among other interpretations, that moral agents have duties or obligations only where they are able to perform those duties [40]. At first sight, it draws on some theoretical paradoxes.…”

Section: The 'Potential Ability' Argumentmentioning

confidence: 99%

What, if anything at all, do African societies themselves owe to their own citizens in terms of health?

Ngosso

2023

Int J Equity Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The debate about global justice and health has focused so far on what developed countries owe to developing countries to advance global public health. Less attention has however been paid to the health obligations of developing countries, especially in Sub-Saharan Africa, towards their own people and how this may affect considerations about justice and health in a globalized world. This paper challenges the implicit presumption in global justice theories that African societies, because they are poor, have weaker health obligations toward their own peoples. It makes two main claims. First, despite their economic shortcomings, African governments should have the primary responsibility to protect the domestic side of the human right to health of their own citizens and dumping their own health obligations on rich countries is a disservice to the overall goal of global justice in health. Second, the health obligations of African societies towards their own people should be assessed and grounded also on their potential abilities, and not exclusively on their current abilities. Global justice in health cannot be reduced to what rich countries should do. It must include also what developing countries from Sub-Saharan Africa should do beyond accepting or managing any health assistance.

show abstract

Section: The 'Potential Ability' Argumentmentioning

confidence: 99%

What, if anything at all, do African societies themselves owe to their own citizens in terms of health?

Ngosso

2023

Int J Equity Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The agency dilemma suggests that an agent who is not autonomouswho is influenced or dominated by another -cannot be considered to be moral, or held morally responsible for their actions (MacKay 2020). Similarly, the concept that "ought implies can" (that is if a person cannot act then they cannot be morally obligated to do so) removes moral agency and responsibility in the absence of the ability to act (Buckwalter 2020). Some feminist theorists have argued for the ability of heteronomous agents to be held morally responsible (MacKay 2020), and despite the wide acceptance of "ought implies can", there are arguments against this concept, Buckwalter (2020) suggests that whilst we may not blame someone for failing to act where they cannot, that does not necessarily remove their moral responsibility.…”

Section: Virtue Ethics (Hursthouse and Pettigrove 2022)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Ethics, Care, and the Architect’s Responsibility to Society and Environment

Fraser,

Burgess,

Burfoot

et al. 2023

ESSD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the context of both a crisis of affordable housing and a climate and biodiversity crisis, what is the architect’s responsibility to society and the planet? New Zealand architects’ code of ethics is set out in legislation: Architects Rules 2006. These rules address the obligation of the architect to the client, and to the profession. However, beyond a requirement to uphold the law and to report on risk to public health and safety, there are no specific rules addressing the impact of architecture on future occupants, wider society, the climate, or the biosphere. Arguably, architects are legally obligated to meet the needs and goals of their clients, over any responsibility they may feel to design socially and environmentally sensitive and resilient buildings. Feminist ethics of care emphasises the importance of our relationships with others. Fundamental to care ethics is attentiveness to the needs of others who we are in relation with, and increasingly, our understanding of these relations is being extended beyond the direct relationship to a global and planetary view. Taking an ethics of care lens to the Code of Minimum Standards of Ethical Conduct for Registered Architects, we contend that these rules are inadequate to equip architects to face present and future challenges. We argue that responsible design needs to be embedded as an ethical obligation of architects. The underlying ethical framework of architects’ professional ethics should be reconsidered in relation to the needs of our society and our planet.

show abstract

“…Zira normal zamanlarda kurallara riayet etmek için gerekli şartlar mevcut iken, kriz durumlarında ise kuralların gereğini yerine getirmek şartların zorlamasından ötürü mümkün olamayabilmektedir. Bunu, 18. yüzyılın Alman filozofu Immanuel Kant'a atfedilen "ought implies can" prensibi yani "yükümlülükler onları yerine getirebilme kabiliyeti gerektirir" ile de açıklayabiliriz 46 . Bu sebeple, önceliklendirme uygulamasını hekimlerin veya sağlık çalışanlarının keyfi bir şekilde hasta ayrımına gitmesi şeklinde katıksız bir haksız fiil değil, olağanüstü şartların dayattığı bir fiil olarak değerlendirebiliriz 47 .…”

Section: öNceli̇klendi̇rme Uygulamasinin Meşruluğuunclassified

Assessing the Link Between Limited Access to Healthcare and Violation of the Right to Life in Europe During Covid-19 Outbreak

BEKTAŞ

REÇBER>

2020

İnönü Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coğrafyadan bağımsız olarak olağanüstü koşullarda normal zamanlarda olmazsa olmaz özellik atfedilen kaideler dahi askıya alınabilmektedir. Bu sebeple, olağanüstü durumlarda toplumların özellikle insan haklarını koruma mekanizmalarının etkinliği test edilir. Yeni koronavirüs salgını (COVID-19) tüm dünyada insanların günlük yaşamına emsali görülmemiş olumsuz bir etki bırakmış, Avrupa devletleri de bu süreçte çeşitli tedbirlere başvurarak bazı temel kişisel hürriyetlere kısıtlamalar getirmiştir. Salgının hızla yayılıp kayıpların ciddi boyutlara ulaştığı İngiltere, Fransa, İtalya ve İspanya gibi Avrupa ülkelerinde sağlık altyapıları yetersiz kalmış ve kısıtlı sağlık imkânlarının tahsisinde yaşama şansı yüksek olan hastalara öncelik tanıyan "önceliklendirme" uygulamasına gidilmiştir. Lakin bu uygulama, sağlık hizmetlerinden mahrum bırakılan hastaların yaşama hakkının ihlal edildiğine dair tartışmaları da beraberinde getirmiştir. Mevcut çalışma, "önceliklendirme" uygulamasını Avrupa İnsan Hakları Sözleşmesi'nin (AİHS) ilgili düzenlemeleri ve Avrupa İnsan Hakları Mahkemesi (AİHM) içtihadı açısından ele alarak, bu uygulamadan dolayı sağlık hizmetlerinde yaşanan mahrumiyetin yaşama hakkını ihlal edip etmediğini ve bu sebeple ilgili Avrupa devletlerine sorumluluk isnat edilip edilmeyeceğini incelemiştir..

show abstract

Theoretical Motivation of “Ought Implies Can”

Cited by 9 publications

References 59 publications

What, if anything at all, do African societies themselves owe to their own citizens in terms of health?

What, if anything at all, do African societies themselves owe to their own citizens in terms of health?

Ethics, Care, and the Architect’s Responsibility to Society and Environment

Assessing the Link Between Limited Access to Healthcare and Violation of the Right to Life in Europe During Covid-19 Outbreak

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About