The principle of double effect

Updated Wednesday 27th February 2008

Is there a difference between deliberately killing someone and doing something that will lead to their death? Nigel Warburton explores the Doctrine of Double Effect.

Some people believe there is a significant moral difference between deliberately killing someone and performing an action that you know will result in another's death. These people subscribe to what is known as the Doctrine of Double Effect, a principle drawing a distinction between intentionally doing something undesirable and doing something where you foresee an undesirable consequence, but don’t wish this consequence. The name 'Double Effect' comes from the fact that the action in question is thought to have two effects: a good one (intended) and a bad one (merely foreseen).

It may sound esoteric, but this principle has many vitally important applications: for example in medical cases. A doctor may justify administering a lethal pain-killing drug that predictably hastens a patient's death on the grounds that she aims to lessen the patient's pain rather than kill him. 

Critics of this view, including strict utilitarians, will say that if the predictable consequences are the same, the moral worth of the actions must be the same. If you know your actions will result in a death, what difference can it make if you intend this death, rather than merely foresee it? Some of those who subscribe to the Doctrine of Double Effect do so because they are members of a religion that has an absolute prohibition on intentional killing; from outside these religions the double effect doctrine can look like a convenient kind of conscience-saving rationalization. 

Through a series of ingenious, if highly implausible, thought experiments involving out-of-control trolleys, innocent people tied to railway tracks (and, in one case, a fat man pushed over a bridge), Michael Otsuka defends the Doctrine. In this weeks’ Ethics Bites, he claims that our intuitions about these cases support the Doctrine. 

I'm not completely convinced he's right. Perhaps what we need to do is abandon our intuitions, rather than stick to the Doctrine.

Further Reading

 

For further information, take a look at our frequently asked questions which may give you the support you need.

Have a question?

Other content you may like

History & The Arts 

The Golden Ratio: Possibly the best rectangle in the world

Our animation introduces the Golden Ratio and how mathematics itself conveys what is beautiful.

Video
5 mins

History & The Arts 

The ancient conflict

Enjoy a philosophical exploration of the ancient conflict that simmers between Star Trek's Spock and  McCoy

Article

History & The Arts 

Sandel on Kant and the capacity for reason

Michael Sandel looks at how Kant's emphasis on our capacity to reason has a place for beings who lack much in the way of reasoning ability or rationality

Video
5 mins

History & The Arts 

The right to have babies

As IVF technology has developed, so have ethical questions surrounding its use have grown. Does everyone have the right to have babies?

Audio
15 mins

History & The Arts 

Why should we care about climate change?

Why should we care about the future generations who’ll be affected by global warming? Should the West shoulder the responsibility for tackling climate change?

Audio
15 mins

History & The Arts 

Emotion: An introductory picture

What is emotion? This free course, Emotion: An introductory picture, takes a philosophical approach to this question in an attempt to understand why people respond to events in a certain way. Is there a difference between an emotion and a bodily feeling or is one a consequence of the other?

Free course
20 hrs

History & The Arts 

If a tree falls in a forest and nobody is there to hear it, does it make a sound?

This animation explores Bishop George Berkeley who though the only things that truly exists are minds and ideas.

Video
5 mins

History & The Arts 

Science is based on fact. Cold, unchanging, unarguable facts. Or perhaps not.

Can scientific theories only really be called 'scientific' if they can be proven false? Karl Popper thought so...

Video
5 mins

History & The Arts 

Wittgenstein’s Beetle in the Box Analogy

This animation looks at Wittgenstein's thinking that problems were caused by a 'bewitchment of language'.

Video
5 mins