Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Defeating Wrongdoing

Why Victims of Unjust Harm Should Take Priority over Victims of Bad Luck

Bibliographic Data

ID20316699
AuthorsGöran Duus‐otterström (0000-0001-9133-7300), Göran Duus-Otterström, Edward A Page
Year2023
Volume49
Issue1
Pages57-77
Publication date2023-01-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueSocial Theory and Practice (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0037-802X • E-ISSN: 2154-123X
PublisherPhilosophy Documentation Center (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.5840/soctheorpract202337180
OpenAlexW4324277730
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited12

It is sometimes suggested that victims of unjust harm should take priority over victims of other forms of harm. We explore four arguments for this view: that victims of unjust harm experience greater suffering; that prioritizing victims of unjust harm would help prevent unjust harm in the future; that it is good for perpetrators that their victims be prioritized; and that it is impersonally better that victims of unjust harm are prioritized. We argue that the first three arguments fail but that the fourth argument succeeds. Moral agents have a reason to prioritize victims of wrongdoing because this secures the impersonal value of corrective justice. However, this reason can be activated differently for different agents depending on how they are situated relative to the wrongdoing, and it may be outweighed by other factors, such as the extent of the harm that could be alleviated

Argument (complex analysis) · Criminology · Economic Justice · Harm · Harm principle · Injustice · Law and economics · Political science · Restitution · Sociology · Wrongdoing · Ethics in medical practice · Free Will and Agency · Law · Medicine · Psychology · Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment

  • Legacies of Historical Injustice

    Open Access•Santiago Truccone Borgogno•Res Publica. Revista de Historia…•2024

  • Justice and Reconciliation in World Politics

    Catherine Lu•Justice and Reconciliation in…•2017

  • ‘A Doctrine Quite New and Altogether Untenable’

    Open Access•Daniel Butt•Journal of Applied Philosophy•2014

  • Equality, Priority or What?

    Open Access•Larry S Temkin•Economics and Philosophy•2003

  • On the Real World Duties Imposed on Us by Human Rights

    Open Access•Zofia Stemplowska•Journal of Social Philosophy•2009

  • Well-being

    James Griffin•Well-being•1988

  • Benefiting from Injustice and Brute Luck

    Carl Knight•Social Theory and Practice•2013

  • What is the Wrong in Retaining Benefits from Wrongdoing? How Recent Attempts to Formulate a Plausible Rationale for the ‘Beneficiary Pays Principle’ Have Failed

    Open Access•Sigurd Lindstad•Res Publica. Revista de Historia…•2019

  • Qui bono? Justice in the Distribution of the Benefits and Burdens of Avoided Deforestation

    Open Access•Ed Page•Res Publica. Revista de Historia…•2015

  • Affirmative Action, Historical Injustice, and the Concept of Beneficiaries

    Open Access•Kasper Lippert‐rasmussen•Journal of Political Philosophy•2016

  • Benefiting from Injustice and the Common-Source Problem

    Open Access•Göran Duus‐otterström•Ethical Theory and Moral Practice•2017

  • Should the beneficiaries pay

    Open Access•Robert Huseby•Politics Philosophy & Economics•2013

  • Disgorging the Fruits of Historical Wrongdoing

    Open Access•Robert E Goodin•American Political Science Review•2013

Unique citing works1
Citations per year0,5
Citation span2024 - 2024 (1)
Citation velocityrecent
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 1
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae