Everyone's got something they just can't give up: a challenge to Feinberg's adherence to the Volenti maxim

Public Deposited
Analytics

Downloadable Content

Download PDF
Request Version for Screen Reader
Last Modified
  • March 20, 2019
Creator
  • Kling, Jennifer
    • Affiliation: College of Arts and Sciences, Department of Philosophy
Abstract
  • In this paper, I challenge Joel Feinberg's in-principle unconditional adherence to the Volenti maxim, which states, roughly, that to he who consents, no wrong is done. Given the resources available in his theory of when a community can legitimately use the criminal law to prohibit actions, it seems that Feinberg need not hold that a person's consent always nullifies the wrong done to her. Through the lens of a particularly troubling case, I attempt to demonstrate that Feinberg can and should accept, given his prioritization of the doctrine of sovereign self-rule, that there are limits to consent's ability to nullify wrongdoing. I conclude by showing that accepting limitations on the Volenti maxim is not only consistent with Feinberg's theory, but actually enables his theory to consider a range of problematic cases in a fresh light.
Date of publication
DOI
Resource type
Rights statement
  • In Copyright
Note
  • "... in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in the Department of Philosophy."
Advisor
  • Postema, Gerald J.
Language
Publisher
Place of publication
  • Chapel Hill, NC
Access right
  • Open access
Date uploaded
  • March 18, 2013

Relations

Parents:

This work has no parents.

Items

Thumbnail Title Date Uploaded Visibility Actions
file details 2019-04-09 Public Download