
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.

63,995 Listeners

15,230 Listeners

11,418 Listeners

1,086 Listeners

782 Listeners

1,227 Listeners

2,118 Listeners

201 Listeners

2,678 Listeners

5,577 Listeners

870 Listeners

303 Listeners

1,606 Listeners

946 Listeners

3,911 Listeners

903 Listeners

2,883 Listeners

315 Listeners

512 Listeners

8,311 Listeners

4,167 Listeners

465 Listeners

231 Listeners

347 Listeners