S. Green
{"title":"Necrophilia","authors":"S. Green","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780197507483.003.0019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter offers a discussion of necrophilia, an offense that has been almost completely ignored in the criminal law theory literature but that raises interesting moral and conceptual issues—about the limits of the harm and wrong principles and the problem of the so-called missing subject. After ruling out a harm to third parties rationale, it suggests that the most plausible argument for criminalizing necrophilia is that it causes harm to the deceased person whose corpse is mistreated. But does it make sense to say that a person can suffer harms or wrongs postmortem? The question has an ancient philosophical pedigree and remains contentious. The chapter argues that the wrong caused by necrophilia is not to the corpse as such but to the antemortem person the corpse once embodied, who had an interest in maintaining her sexual autonomy while she was still alive.","PeriodicalId":233910,"journal":{"name":"Criminalizing Sex","volume":"104 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Criminalizing Sex","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197507483.003.0019","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

这一章讨论了恋尸癖,这一罪行在刑法理论文献中几乎完全被忽视,但它提出了有趣的道德和概念问题——关于伤害和错误原则的限制以及所谓的缺失主体问题。在排除了对第三方造成伤害的理由后,它表明,将恋尸癖定为犯罪的最合理的论点是,它会对尸体被虐待的死者造成伤害。但是说一个人在死后会遭受伤害或错误有意义吗?这个问题有着古老的哲学渊源,至今仍有争议。这一章认为,恋尸癖造成的错误不是对尸体本身造成的,而是对尸体曾经体现的临死前的人造成的,在她还活着的时候,她有兴趣保持她的性自主权。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Necrophilia
This chapter offers a discussion of necrophilia, an offense that has been almost completely ignored in the criminal law theory literature but that raises interesting moral and conceptual issues—about the limits of the harm and wrong principles and the problem of the so-called missing subject. After ruling out a harm to third parties rationale, it suggests that the most plausible argument for criminalizing necrophilia is that it causes harm to the deceased person whose corpse is mistreated. But does it make sense to say that a person can suffer harms or wrongs postmortem? The question has an ancient philosophical pedigree and remains contentious. The chapter argues that the wrong caused by necrophilia is not to the corpse as such but to the antemortem person the corpse once embodied, who had an interest in maintaining her sexual autonomy while she was still alive.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信