Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-2h6rp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-10-02T20:53:59.374Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Necessitate Without Inclining

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 April 2010

André Gombay
André Gombay
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Imagine this sequence of events. I am at the wheel of my car at an intersection, waiting for the lights to change. Suddenly, a stranger runs out of the bank building at the corner, makes his way into the car, puts a gun to my head and orders me to drive off, on the double. Eventually there's a chase and we are caught.

Type
Articles
Information
Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue canadienne de philosophie , Volume 24 , Issue 4 , Winter 1985 , pp. 579 - 587
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Philosophical Association 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 It is probable, however, that a wider defence is available to an accused who is merely a party to an offence, and not its principal agent.

2 Stephen, James Fitzjames, History of the Criminal Law of England, vol. 2 (London: Macmillan, 1883), 107, quoted by Lord Salmon, R. v. Abbott (1976)Google Scholar.

3 Baker, Brenda, “Acting Under Duress”, Canadian Journal of Philosophy 3 (1973-1974), 516–521Google Scholar.

4 The formula is ubiquitous, never very well explained; the clearest account I know is in part three of the Theodicy, especially §311: in §325, Leibniz argues that action under duress is voluntary.