How a pure risk of harm can itself be a harm: A reply to Rowe

Analysis 84 (1):112-116 (2024)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Rowe has recently argued that pure risk of harm cannot itself be a harm. I respond to Rowe and argue that given an appropriate understanding of objective probabilities, pure objective risk of harm can itself be a harm.

Similar books and articles

Can a risk of harm itself be a harm?Thomas Rowe - 2022 - Analysis 81 (4):694-701.
On the Harm of Imposing Risk of Harm.Kritika Maheshwari - 2021 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 24 (4):965-980.
When the Risk of Harm Harms.Adriana Placani - 2017 - Law and Philosophy 36 (1):77-100.
‘But You Could Have Hurt Me!’: Risk and Harm.Joseph Bowen - 2022 - Law and Philosophy 41 (4):517-546.
"Making More Sense of" Minimal Risk".Deborah Barnbaum - 2002 - IRB: Ethics & Human Research 24 (3):10-13.
The moral limits of the criminal law.Joel Feinberg - 1984 - New York: Oxford University Press.
What’s wrong with risk?Tom Parr & Adam Slavny - 2019 - Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 8 (2):76-85.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-05-26

Downloads
331 (#62,288)

6 months
147 (#24,322)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

H. Orri Stefansson
Stockholm University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations