Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 7
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    DeMartino, George F. 2016. The Economist's Oath: On Economic Agency, Economic Theory, Pluralism, and Econogenic Harm. Rethinking Marxism, Vol. 28, Issue. 1, p. 47.

    Eisenberg, Theodore and Engel, Christoph 2016. Unpacking Negligence Liability: Experimentally Testing the Governance Effect. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, Vol. 13, Issue. 1, p. 116.

    Francis, Leslie 2016. Encyclopedia of Global Bioethics.

    DeMartino, George F. 2015. Harming Irreparably: On Neoliberalism, Kaldor-Hicks, and the Paretian Guarantee. Review of Social Economy, Vol. 73, Issue. 4, p. 315.

    Francis, Leslie 2015. Creation Ethicsand the harms of existence. Journal of Medical Ethics, Vol. 41, Issue. 5, p. 418.

    Hanna, Nathan 2015. Harm: Omission, Preemption, Freedom. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, p. n/a.

    Keating, Gregory C. 2012. THE PRIORITY OF RESPECT OVER REPAIR. Legal Theory, Vol. 18, Issue. 03, p. 293.



  • Seana Valentine Shiffrin (a1)
  • DOI:
  • Published online: 16 August 2012

Standard, familiar models portray harms and benefits as symmetrical. Usually, harm is portrayed as involving a worsening of one's situation, and benefits as involving an improvement. Yet morally, the aversion, prevention, and relief of harms seem, at least presumptively, to matter more than the provision, protection, and maintenance of comparable and often greater benefits. Standard models of harms and benefits have difficulty acknowledging this priority, much less explaining it. They also fail to identify harm accurately and reliably. In this paper, I develop these problems, argue that we should reconsider our commitment to the standard models, and then merely gesture at the direction in which we might locate a superior approach, one that better accounts for the moral significance of harm and its relation to autonomy rights.

Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

Matthew Hanser , The Metaphysics of Harm, 77 Phil. & Phenomenological Res. 421 (2008)

Matthew Hanser, Harming and Procreating, inHarming Future Persons 179 (Melinda A. Roberts & David T. Wasserman eds., 2009)

Matthew Hanser , Still More on the Metaphysics of Harm, 82 Phil. & Phenomenological Res. 459 (2011)

Judith Jarvis Thomson , More on the Metaphysics of Harm, 82 Phil. & Phenomenological Res. 436 (2011)

James Griffin , Is Unhappiness Morally More Important Than Happiness?, 29 Phil. Q. 47 (1979)

Jeff McMahan , Cognitive Disability, Misfortune, and Justice, 25 Phil. & Pub. Aff. 3 (1996)

Thomas Scanlon , Preference and Urgency, 72 J. Phil. 655 (1975)

Matthew Hanser , Why Are Killing and Letting Die Wrong?, 24 Phil. & Pub. Aff. 175 (1995)

Matthew Hanser , A Puzzle about Beneficence, 58 Analysis 159166 (1998)

Elizabeth Harman , Can We Harm and Benefit in Creating?, 18 Phil. Persp. 89 (2004), at 96–97

J. David Velleman , Persons in Prospect: Parts 1, II, and III, 36 Philosophy & Public Affairs 221288 (2008)

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Legal Theory
  • ISSN: 1352-3252
  • EISSN: 1469-8048
  • URL: /core/journals/legal-theory
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *