Appropriation of Evil: Cooperation's Mirror Image

Abstract

The author argues that the category of cooperation of evil needs to be supplemented by a new category of appropriation of evil. Cooperation focuses on agents who must decide whether to perform an act that contributes to the morally objectionable action of another. In contrast, appropriation concentrates on the "mirror image" problem faced by agents who must decide whether to make use of the fruits of another agent's morally objectionable action. She suggests that the new category better illuminates problems involved in research using fetal tissue obtained from elective abortions, the purchase of goods made in sweatshops, and some affiliations between Catholic health care facilities and those that perform procedures prohibited by the Ethical and Religious Directives.]

Payback, Forgiveness, Accountability: Exercising Responsible Agency in the Midst of Structured Racial Harm

“…This basic presupposition of Catholic casuistry informs the principle of licit material cooperation in evil, devised in the interest of determining whether and how a well-intentioned agent may involve themselves in the wrongful action of another agent or in an unjust system, in order to reduce a harmful outcome (Barrera 2014, p. 14). This general principle has been applied to particular ethical questions about stem cell research, HIV/AIDS prevention, participation in electoral politics, and economic supply chains (Keenan 1989;Kaveny 2000;Rubio 2011).…”

Advocating Worker Justice

“…Traditionally the principle of cooperation pertains to two agents and two different actions, with the “cooperator” either unintentionally or intentionally abetting the other agent's sinful action. In Kaveny's view, “appropriation” of evil more aptly describes many instances of our entanglement in evil today, such as buying clothes produced in sweatshops, because we are appropriating the fruits of another's evil action ex post facto, rather than facilitating the evil action (of another agent) with our own choices (Kaveny , 290–94; ).…”

“…Kaveny compellingly argues for the adoption of the concept of appropriation of evil in lieu of cooperation with regard to certain cases, mostly in the area of bioethics (Kaveny , 294–312). However, consumers who purchase sweatshop‐made goods do in fact encourage further sinful action by corporations.…”

Four moral questions for human embryonic stem cell research

“…However, a second question complicates matters: the question of whether we can ally ourselves with acts that we morally oppose or even abhor. In ethical terms, it is the question of benefiting from or cooperating with moral wrongdoing 8,11 . In the stem cell debate it is the question of whether researchers, clinicians, or patients may use stem cell lines that others have independently derived.…”

“…Ethical views on the question of whether one may ever benefit from others' wrongdoing are very diverse. Even the Roman Catholic moral tradition, with its staunch opposition to complicity with wrongdoing, presents different answers, including some that permit deriving benefit in particular cases 11,14 . This suggests that some individual researchers, clinicians, or patients who believe that embryos should not be destroyed may nevertheless conscientiously arrive at the view that they can use hESC lines.…”