Ethical Theory and Moral Practice

, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp 353–354 | Cite as


  • Albert W. Musschenga
  • Robert Heeger

Seth R.M. Lazar opens this issue with an article in which he asks how—and whether—the rectification of injury at which corrective justice aims is possible, and by whom it must be performed. He splits the injury up into components of harm and wrong, and considers their rectification separately. First, he shows that pecuniary compensation for the harm is practically plausible, because money acts as a mediator between the damaged interest and other interests, and also morally plausible approach because it does not claim too much for compensation. Turning to the wrong he argues that it can only be rectified by a full apology by the injurer himself.

The subject of Douglas W. Portmore’s article is the accommodation of agent-centred options. He argues that those moral theorists who wish to accommodate agent-centred options and supererogatory acts, must accept both that the reason an agent has to promote her own interests is a nonmoral reason and that this nonmoral reason can prevent the moral...

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Blaise Pascal InstituteVrije UniversiteitAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations