To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Will capitalism bring about the end of the world or is a different future possible? In this book, Daniel P. Rhodes diagnoses the dystopic reign of capital in the contemporary world. He shows how it captures politics and history while colonizing the state and its subjects under its dominion, for the purpose of constructing a (dis)order that achieves extravagant wealth for a few at the top by enabling exploitation of and extraction from an expanding lower class. Surveying Marxist and theological utopian alternatives, Rhodes then recovers an apocalyptic, theological politics drawn from the person and work of Jesus Christ and argues for an ecclesial vision of social renewal. The Church, by acting in a way that reflects Christ's fundamental humanity, can be a site and source of radical solidarity, material and spiritual forgiveness, justice-infused deliberation, and creative peace-making. It can also offer a powerful foretaste of an alternative future that, eschatologically, will last.
Domestication is not just something that humans impose on animals, but an ancient structure binding both creatures within shared systems of subjugation. Advancing trenchant new ideas, David Carr unpacks Genesis 1–11 to reveal ways in which embedded human–animal, gender, and group hierarchies constitute our world. Drawing on animal studies and Indigenous perspectives alike, he treats the Bible's origin stories as an invitation to rethink inter-species flourishing and re-imagine community based on intrinsic worth rather than mere utility. Tracing human rule over creation in Eden to slavery and concentrated human power at Babel, the author exposes an escalating trajectory of domination. Yet these foundational stories also suggest that global subjugation is not inevitable, but instead the consequence of a fall from an earlier relational, reciprocal mode of living. Here is a hopeful framework that recognizes this crisis while offering alternatives rooted in respectful relations and multispecies kinship.
In this chapter I argue that self-defense is permissible against an unjust attack, but that any lethal harm must be, in Aquinas’s phrase, praeter intentionem, outside the intention of the defender. I argue that public authorities must also not intend death, but that because of the nature of the political task, public officials are capacitated to use force to a greater extent and in greater measure than are private individuals.
In this chapter I consider the moral status of radically impaired persons, such as those in a persistent vegetative state. Drawing on earlier arguments in the book, I show that human beings in such states retain their personal nature and entitlement to immunity from intentional killing.
In this chapter I respond to the claim that medical assistance in dying (physician-assisted suicide, euthanasia) is justified if refusal or withdrawal of life-sustaining care is. I conclude with a reflection on the importance of a norm against intentional killing to the medical profession
In this chapter I argue that God’s love and goodness make it impossible for him either to intend the evil of human death or to delegate the authority to take a human life. This concludes my argument for the absolute norm against intending death.
In this chapter I respond to two claims about unborn human beings: first that they have no rights because they have no interests; second that they have no rights because they are not persons.
In this chapter I extend the analysis of the previous chapter to defense against innocent threats. Once again, the norm against intending death applies, but the standards for permissible killing as a side effect are stricter than in the case of unjust threats.
In this chapter I argue that the norm against intentional killing is a moral absolute, identifying an action never to be done. On this ground, the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and other allied bombings in World War II, are shown to have been morally unjustified.
In this chapter I give a preliminary argument against suicide, based on the core argument of the book. Suicide is distinguished from permisible acceptance of death as a side effect of some other permissible action.
In this chapter I trace the problem of killing in Christian thought. I then raise the question of whether any intentional killing can be justified; in the remainder of the book I argue that the answer to this question is “no”.