Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorSudarshan, Saranga
dc.date.accessioned2020-10-15T10:30:01Z
dc.date.available2020-10-15T10:30:01Z
dc.date.issued2020-10-14
dc.identifier270306232
dc.identifier938b527f-6bcf-4022-80fd-36cc21aa1dd3
dc.identifier000577666800001
dc.identifier85092586920
dc.identifier.citationSudarshan , S 2020 , ' The irrevocability of capital punishment and active voluntary euthanasia ' , Journal of Applied Philosophy , vol. Early View . https://doi.org/10.1111/japp.12478en
dc.identifier.issn0264-3758
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10023/20785
dc.description.abstractOne argument often made against capital punishment is that it would involve the risk of killing innocent people and that such a mistake cannot be corrected in ways that other punishments can. I call this the ‘Irrevocability Argument’. In this article, I argue that the Irrevocability Argument is symmetrical with respect to capital punishment and active voluntary euthanasia. If the Irrevocability Argument works against capital punishment, then it also works against active voluntary euthanasia and vice versa. The main upshot of this is that it means at least some of the moral positions that people hold to treat them differently are untenable. Those who rely on the Irrevocability Argument as an argument against capital punishment are also committed to it as an argument against active voluntary euthanasia.
dc.format.extent13
dc.format.extent113531
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofJournal of Applied Philosophyen
dc.subjectB Philosophy (General)en
dc.subjectT-NDASen
dc.subject.lccB1en
dc.titleThe irrevocability of capital punishment and active voluntary euthanasiaen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. Philosophyen
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/japp.12478
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record