Benefiting from (past) Wrongdoing

(also: appropriation of (past) evil; profiting from evil)

PD Dr. Christian Erk

The page numbers in this presentation may not be continuous due to intentionally hidden slides.
Benefiting from (past) Wrongdoing

• Usually, the object of ethics are individual actions

• However, there are also cases where a person (“appropriator”/ “beneficiary”)

takes advantage of the fruits or byproducts of another person’s (“auxiliary
agent”) past evil action (“primary action”) with which the beneficiary did not
cooperate

 Benefiting from (past) Wrongdoing

(also: appropriation of (past) evil; profiting from evil)

© PD Dr. Christian Erk Slide 2

Benefiting from (past) Wrongdoing

Using medical data from Nazi Buying clothes made by means of exploitation Design/ development, production, testing
human experimentation of children/ child labour («fast fashion») of vaccines with abortion‐tainted fetal tissue

Forced Organ Harvesting/ Organ Trafficking Buying jewellery made of conflict diamonds Accepting promotion instead of unjustly fired colleague
© PD Dr. Christian Erk Slide 3
Benefiting from (past) Wrongdoing
What is the ethical Problem?
• Cooperation with wrongdoing vs. Appropriation of wrongdoing
– Temporal difference
• Cooperation: Wrongdoing will only happen in the future, i.e. after the cooperation, and is therefore
preventable
• Appropriation: Wrongdoing has already happened in the past, i.e. prior to the appropriation
– Difference with respect to consequences
• Cooperation: Has both good and evil consequence  «Doctrine of Double Effect» applies
– Good consequence: Avoidance of loss and/ or gain of benefit
– Evil consequence: Performance of primary action
• Appropriation: Only has a good consequence (avoidance of loss and/ or gain of benefit)
– Performance of primary action not causally related to appropriation
– «Doctrine of Double Effect» does not apply (means‐end‐condition not applicable)

• So, if an appropriation only has a good consequence, what is it that makes it ethically
problematic?

© PD Dr. Christian Erk Slide 6

Benefiting from (past) Wrongdoing
Cooperation vs. Appropriation

• If an appropriation contributes to the continuation of the

wrongdoing, we are not only dealing with a case of
appropriation but also cooperation!

• Examples
– If I buy something made by slave labor in Africa, it’s appropriation but
also cooperation as they are more likely to keep using slave labor to
make that.
– If I take data from scientific studies done by Nazis, it can be
appropriation without cooperation.

© PD Dr. Christian Erk Slide 7

Benefiting from (past) Wrongdoing
What is the ethical Problem?
Who? About what? How?
Circumstance of Quantity Circumstance of Mode and
Circumstance of Agent
and Quality of A Manner of A
Circumstance of Intention

Exterior Action (A)

Circumstance of Effects
(Actual)
(= Means to realise purpose; quid) Consequences
Purpose (P) • Natural end of A

What?
Why?

(= essential C of A)
(End of agent; finis
• End of agent, if realised
operantis; propter quid)
Natural End of A (=non-essential C of A)
(End of action; finis operis) • Accidental consequences
of A

Circumstance of Helps
Circumstance of Place of A Circumstance of Time of A
and Influences
By what or whose aid? Where? When?
Erk, 202X: YY

© PD Dr. Christian Erk Slide 8

Benefiting from (past) Wrongdoing
What is the ethical Problem?
• It is the circumstance «with respect to what/ about what?» that makes the
appropriation of a past wrongdoing ethically problematic

• This circumstance «with respect to what/ about what?» (circa quid)

– details the distinctive qualitative and/ or quantitative characteristics of the object which
undergoes the exterior action
– refers to the “merely” accidental properties of the exterior action, namely the quality and quantity
of the object or matter affected by it

• In the case of an appropriation of wrongdoing the object which undergoes the exterior
action is the fruit or byproduct of a past evil action and, therefore, ethically tainted

 When is the appropriation of the fruits or byproducts of another person’s past evil
action (with which the beneficiary did not cooperate) itself an evil action?

© PD Dr. Christian Erk Slide 9

Kinds of Benefiting/ Appropriation

Benefiting/ Appropriation
(positive or negative)

Degree of Co‐Voluntariness Degree of Proximity

Formal Material Proximate Remote

appropriation appropriation appropriation appropriation

← Con nuum →

Explicit formal Implicit formal

appropriation appropriation

© PD Dr. Christian Erk Slide 10

The Ethics of Benefiting from (past) Wrongdoing

When is the appropriation of the fruits or byproducts of another person’s past

evil action (with which the beneficiary did not cooperate) itself an evil action?

Degree of Co‐Voluntariness
Material Appropriation
Kind of Appropriation Formal Appropriation (Beneficiary neither approves of auxiliary agent’s
(Beneficiary approves of auxiliary agent’s evil evil action (finis operis) nor of finis operantis of
action (finis operis) from which he benefits (and auxiliary agent but chooses to appropriate its
possibly also of finis operantis of auxiliary agent)) fruits to avoid some loss or gain some benefit to
himself or third party)
Degree of Proximity

Proximate Morally impermissible/ Morally permissible under

Appropriation not allowed certain conditions

Remote Morally impermissible/ Morally permissible under

Appropriation not allowed certain conditions

© PD Dr. Christian Erk Slide 12

The Ethics of Benefiting from Wrongdoing
The Ethical Permissibility of a Material Appropriation
• A material appropriation can be morally permissible provided that the following
conditions are met:
– Nature‐of‐the‐act condition: The exterior appropriative action must itself be good or at least
indifferent, i.e. the exterior appropriative action must have a good or at least indifferent finis
operis.
– Right‐intention condition: The purpose the appropriator pursues with the material
appropriation, i.e. the finis operantis of the appropriative action, must be good.
– Proportionality condition: The appropriator must have a sufficiently grave reason for the
material appropriation.

• Applying the proportionality condition to individual cases requires a weighing of

a range of factors which is often difficult and dependent on prudence in
judgement!

© PD Dr. Christian Erk Slide 13

The Ethics of Benefiting from Wrongdoing/ The Ethical Permissibility of a Material Appropriation
Applying the Proportionality Condition
Proportionality assessment in cases of a material appropriation
• Evilness of past primary action
• Degree of spatio‐temporal and causal proximity
appropriation ↔ primary action
• Potential of appropriation for scandal of the (morally)
weak
• Potential for corruption of appropriator’s moral sense
• Existence/ lack of alternatives for appropriator to
realise his purpose
• Likelihood of success of appropriative action to
realise its purpose
• Congruency between appropriator’s and primary
agent’s purpose Gravity of good consequence of
• Existence of «just claim» on fruits of primary action appropriation: Extent of loss avoided
on part of beneficiary and/ or benefit gained

© PD Dr. Christian Erk Slide 14

The Ethics of Benefiting from Wrongdoing
Further Conditions for the Ethical Permissibility of a Material Appropriation
• Material appropriation requires explicit protest
– Whether appropriation is formal or material not readily apparent to
observer
– To avoid confusion, material appropriator should – with whatever
evidence he can muster – express his dismay and abhorrence for the
primary action and make explicit that he is benefiting from wrongdoing,
in a material fashion only

• Material appropriation requires search for alternatives

– Material appropriator should aspire to come up with ethically
irreproachable alternatives that allow achieving same effect without
having to appropriate past evil.
– Appropriation of wrongdoing must not be a permanent condition but
always be considered a crutch that we use while searching for better
alternatives.

© PD Dr. Christian Erk Slide 15