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
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.
No keywords specified (fix it)
(categorize this paper)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
Archival date: 2019-04-07
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
109 ( #51,657 of 72,542 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
11 ( #57,828 of 72,542 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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