Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Good Night and Good Luck - In Search of a Neuroscience Challenge to Criminal Justice.Frej Klem Thomsen - 2018 - Utilitas 30 (1):1-31.
    This article clarifies what a neuroscience challenge to criminal justice must look like by sketching the basic structure of the argument, gradually filling out the details and illustrating the conditions that must be met for the challenge to work. In the process of doing so it explores influential work by Joshua Greene and Jonathan Cohen, and Stephen Morse respectively, arguing that the former should not be understood to present a version of the challenge, and that the latter's argument against the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Utilitarianism and the 'Punishment' of the Innocent: The General Problem.Saul Smilansky - 1990 - Analysis 50 (4):256 - 261.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  • Overpunishment and the punishment of the innocent.Saul Smilansky - 2021 - Analytic Philosophy 63 (4):232-244.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Black magic and respecting persons—Some perplexities.Saul Smilansky & Juha Räikkä - 2020 - Ratio 33 (3):173-183.
    Black magic (henceforth BM) is acting in an attempt to harm human beings through supernatural means. Examples include the employment of spells, the use of special curses, the burning of objects related to the purported victim, and the use of pins with voodoo dolls. For the sake of simplicity, we shall focus on attempts to kill through BM. The moral attitude towards BM has not been, as far as we know, significantly discussed in contemporary analytic philosophy. Yet the topic brings (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Two Concepts of Rule Utilitarianism.Rex Martin - 2008 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 5 (2):227-255.
    The notion of rule utilitarianism (a twentieth-century addition to the canon of utilitarian thought) has been discussed under two main headings—ideal-rule utilitarianism and 'indirect' utilitarianism. The distinction between them is often hazy. But we can sketch out each perspective along three different dimensions, contrasting the two conceptions of rule utilitarianism at each of three main hinge points: (1) the grounding of rules, (2) the allowed complexity of rules, (3) the conflict of rules. These two profiles constitute ideal types, but they (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark