Thomas Aquinas 'Doctrine Of Double Effect'

1. “Intending evil is not absolutely impermissible” which is also known as the Doctrine of Double Effect is often cited to explain the permissibility of an act which is evil by nature, such as the death of a human being which is an evil, for a good end like to save the life of another. For example, in cases of uterus cancer, in process to save the life of the mother (good end), the doctor has to take the life of the baby in the womb (morally impermissible act). Influential philosopher Thomas Aquinas is credited with introducing the principle of double effect. First, we have to understand what this doctrine stands for. I feel that in order to achieve the Doctrine of Double Effect, certain justification needs to be provided which rests on the …show more content…
So, even if it is certain that the two bombers will cause numerous civilian deaths, terror bombing is an impermissible act while tactical bombing is permissible; there should be a grave reason to permit the bad action, for example, to kill a person whom you know is intending to kill you would be impermissible because it would amount to intentional killing or murder; however, to strike a person in self-defence is permissible, even if it is foreseeable that the blow by which one defends oneself could be fatal. If one fulfils these criterion then the Doctrine of Double Effect is applicable, however, in my opinion the Doctrine of Double-Effect is a flawed concept and nothing can justify a morally impermissible act. In case of the bombings (in the question), I think it’s morally impermissible to bomb the German noncombatants to prevent the Nazi victory and save Britain who was on the brink of losing the