INTENTS MAY HAVE THEIR OWN INDEPENDENT CONSEQUENCES, RENDERING THE INTENT TO DO SOMETHING IMMORAL MORAL. Gregory S. Kavka. Some Paradoxes of Deterrence The Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 75, No. 6 Jun, 1978), pp. 285-302 WIP ties the morality of an intention exclusively to the moral qualities of its object (i.e., the intended act. This is not unreasonable since, typically, the only significant effects of intentions are the acts of the agent (and the consequences of these acts) which flow from these intentions. However, in certain cases, intentions may have autonomous effects that are independent of the intended act's actually being performed. In particular, intentions to act may influence the conduct of other agents. When an intention has important autonomous effects, these effects must be incorporated into any adequate moral analysis of it. The first paradox arises because the autonomous effects of the relevant deterrent intention are dominant in the moral analysis of an SDS, but the extremely plausible WIP ignores such effects.
10NFL1-Nuclear Weapons Page 161 of 199 www.victorybriefs.com
