
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
15131,513 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.

63,717 Listeners

15,214 Listeners

11,351 Listeners

1,084 Listeners

290 Listeners

2,106 Listeners

209 Listeners

5,506 Listeners

869 Listeners

607 Listeners

147 Listeners

290 Listeners

440 Listeners

1,599 Listeners

944 Listeners

3,922 Listeners

895 Listeners

2,872 Listeners

317 Listeners

507 Listeners

8,271 Listeners

375 Listeners

199 Listeners

277 Listeners