On Wrongs and Crimes : Does Consent Require Only an Attempt to Communicate?

Criminal Law and Philosophy 13 (3):409-423 (2019)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
In Wrongs and Crimes, Victor Tadros clarifies the debate about whether consent needs to be communicated by separating the question of whether consent requires expressive behaviour from the question of whether it requires “uptake” in the form of comprehension by the consent-receiver. Once this distinction is drawn, Tadros argues both that consent does not require uptake and that consent does not require expressive behaviour that provides evidence to the consent-receiver. As a result, Tadros takes the view that consent requires an attempt to communicate, but nothing more. While I have found Tadros’s arguments for this conclusion intriguing and challenging, I am yet to be persuaded by them. In this essay, I try to say why.
Keywords
No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories
(categorize this paper)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
DOUOWA
Revision history
Archival date: 2019-04-07
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
What We Owe to Each Other.Scanlon, Thomas M.
The Realm of Rights.Thomson, Judith Jarvis

View all 10 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2018-06-27

Total views
44 ( #36,017 of 43,016 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
19 ( #28,905 of 43,016 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.