
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


Hitting someone, throwing a ball hard at someone's head, spitting at someone: these are all examples of harmful acts, called 'battery' in Tort Law, and most of us judge those who do such things without the victim's implied or actual consent as morally blameworthy. Could widespread aversion towards such acts be due to some kind of fundamental moral principle? John Mikhail discusses this question with Nigel Warburton in this episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast. Philosophy Bites is made in association with the Institute of Philosophy.
By Edmonds and Warburton4.5
15141,514 ratings
Hitting someone, throwing a ball hard at someone's head, spitting at someone: these are all examples of harmful acts, called 'battery' in Tort Law, and most of us judge those who do such things without the victim's implied or actual consent as morally blameworthy. Could widespread aversion towards such acts be due to some kind of fundamental moral principle? John Mikhail discusses this question with Nigel Warburton in this episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast. Philosophy Bites is made in association with the Institute of Philosophy.

63,929 Listeners

15,251 Listeners

11,437 Listeners

1,083 Listeners

771 Listeners

1,226 Listeners

2,117 Listeners

199 Listeners

2,675 Listeners

5,520 Listeners

870 Listeners

298 Listeners

1,607 Listeners

943 Listeners

3,828 Listeners

901 Listeners

2,882 Listeners

313 Listeners

512 Listeners

8,304 Listeners

4,170 Listeners

461 Listeners

230 Listeners

328 Listeners