Harming as making worse off

Philosophical Studies 176 (10):2629-2656 (2019)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
A powerful argument against the counterfactual comparative account of harm is that it cannot distinguish harming from failing to benefit. In reply to this problem, I suggest a new account of harm. The account is a counterfactual comparative one, but it counts as harms only those events that make a person occupy his level of well-being at the world at which the event occurs. This account distinguishes harming from failing to benefit in a way that accommodates our intuitions about the standard problem cases. In laying the groundwork for this account, I also demonstrate that rival accounts of harm are able to distinguish harming from failing to benefit only if, and because, they also appeal to the distinction between making upshots happen and allowing upshots to happen. One important implication of my discussion is that preserving the moral asymmetry between harming and failing to benefit requires a commitment to the existence of a metaphysical and moral distinction between making and allowing.
(categorize this paper)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2018-09-06
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Causation.Lewis, David K.
A Theory of Conditionals.Stalnaker, Robert

View all 36 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
112 ( #26,125 of 43,794 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
46 ( #16,072 of 43,794 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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