Cooperation in (future) Wrongdoing

PD Dr. Christian Erk

The page numbers in this presentation may not be continuous due to intentionally hidden slides.
Cooperation in (future) Wrongdoing

• Usually, the object of ethics are individual actions

• However, there are also cases where a person (“cooperator”) assists in the future
evil action (“primary action”) of another person (“principal agent”)

 Concept “Cooperation in (future) Wrongdoing” as tool to handle such cases

© PD Dr. Christian Erk Slide 2

Cooperation in (future) Wrongdoing

• Has a person who has

– told another person (who then robs a
bank) that it is fine to rob a bank
– sold a gun to a bank robber
– produced the steel the gun is made of
– lent her car to a bank robber
– sold petrol to a bank robber
– opened the door of the safe
– not tackled the bank robber
– driven the getaway car
– …
cooperated in the bank robber’s evil action?

• How are we to judge such and other cases of cooperation in wrongdoing?

© PD Dr. Christian Erk Slide 3

Kinds of Cooperation

Cases of cooperation can be characterised by means of the following two criteria

• Degree of co‐voluntariness
• Degree of influence

© PD Dr. Christian Erk Slide 7

Kinds of Cooperation

Erk, 2022: 220

© PD Dr. Christian Erk Slide 10

The Ethics of Cooperation in Wrongdoing

When is the cooperation in the evil action (“primary action”) of another person
(“principal agent”) itself an evil action?
Kind of Cooperation
(with an evil act of another person)
intends same finis operis (and possibly also finis
Degree of Influence
Degree of Co‐Voluntariness
Formal Cooperation Material Cooperation
(Cooperator does not intend same finis operis
(Cooperator wants evil action to occur, i.e.
(and possibly also finis operantis) as principal
agent but cooperates to avoid some loss or gain
operantis) as principal agent)
some benefit to himself or third party)

Direct Cooperation
(also: immediate cooperation;
cooperation with the act)

Indirect Cooperation
(also: mediate cooperation; coope‐
rator supplies the means or condi‐
tions for the evil action to take place)

© PD Dr. Christian Erk Slide 11

The Ethics of Cooperation in Wrongdoing
The Ethics of Indirect Material Cooperation
How can we determine the ethical permissibility of indirect material cooperation?

• An indirect material cooperation has two consequences, namely both a good

and an evil consequence
– Good consequence: Avoidance of loss and/ or gain of benefit
– Evil consequence: Future performance of primary action

• The ethical permissibility of indirect material cooperation has to be determined

by means of the «Doctrine of Double Effect» (DDE) and its four conditions

© PD Dr. Christian Erk Slide 13

The Ethics of Cooperation in Wrongdoing
The Ethics of Indirect Material Cooperation
• Indirect material cooperation can be morally permissible provided that the
following four conditions of the «Doctrine of Double Effect» are met:
– Nature‐of‐the‐act condition: The material cooperation must itself be a good or at least an
indifferent action
– Right‐intention condition: The intention of the material cooperator must be good, i.e. the
occurrence of the evil primary act (which is the bad consequence of the material
cooperation) must only be foreseen, but not intended; = cooperation must not be formal
– The means‐end condition: The good consequence of the cooperation must not directly result
from the bad consequence but must rather directly result from the cooperative action; and
– Proportionality condition: There must be a reason for the cooperation proportionate to the
gravity of the bad consequence

• Application of these conditions (esp. the proportionality condition) to individual

cases is often difficult and dependent on prudence in judgement!

© PD Dr. Christian Erk Slide 14

The Ethics of Cooperation in Wrongdoing
Applying the Proportionality Condition
Proportionality assessment in cases of an indirect material cooperation

cf. Erk, 2022: 233

© PD Dr. Christian Erk Slide 15

Cooperation in Wrongdoing
Application: (Physician‐)Assisted Suicide
Under what circumstances, if any, is a physician allowed to assist a patient in her
suicide (e.g. by the prescription of a deadly dosage of a barbiturate or the
preparation of the drug for the ready use of the patient who then kills herself by
means of this drug)?

Murad Jacob “Jack” Kevorkian (1928‐2011) and his death machine “Thanatron” Philip Haig Nitschke‘s – “the Elon Musk of assisted
suicide” (Newsweek) – suicide device “Sarco” (2017)
© PD Dr. Christian Erk Slide 17