Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Negligent Vs. Non-Negligent: A Thomistic Distinction Directing Us Toward A Solution

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this chapter

+ Tax (if applicable)

Chapter Summary

Some of Aquinas's discussions outside of IIa-IIae directly relate to the problem of negligent omissions. This chapter accordingly focuses on them. By doing so, it ultimately arrives at the surprising conclusion that Aquinas would have to admit that the locus of culpability, and therefore of voluntariness, in NO's such as one is interested in lies in a non-negligent omission. The chapter further explains that this fact need not destroy the distinction between negligent and non-negligent omissions; the distinction can still be regarded as valid within Aquinas's framework. It shows how the insights gained from attempting to render Aquinas consistent by means of this conclusion can be regarded as agreeable with and somewhat prescient of the own ultimate solution to the problem of NO's. The chapter gives a brief overview of Aquinas's action theory.

Keywords: Aquinas; IIa-IIae



Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
    The Problem of Negligent Omissions — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation