Department of Philosophy, University of Saskatchewan, 9 Campus Drive, Saskatoon, SK, S7K5A5, Canada.
Health Care Anal. 2020 Dec;28(4):335-342. doi: 10.1007/s10728-020-00408-8. Epub 2020 Oct 16.
The justification for harm reduction as an approach to drug use and addiction is seen by many to be consequentialist in form and it has been claimed that as a deontologist Kant would reject harm reduction. I argue this is wrong on both counts. A more nuanced understanding of harm reduction and Kant shows them compatible. Kant's own remarks about intoxication reinforce this. Moreover, there is a Kantian argument that harm reduction is not only morally permissible but more consistent with the Kantian duty of respect for autonomy than mandatory abstinence approaches.
减少伤害作为一种对待药物使用和成瘾的方法，其正当性在许多人看来是一种后果主义的形式，有人声称，作为一个道义论者，康德会拒绝减少伤害。我认为这两点都是错误的。对减少伤害和康德的更细致的理解表明它们是相容的。康德自己关于陶醉的言论也强化了这一点。此外，还有一个康德式的论点认为，减少伤害不仅在道德上是允许的，而且比强制性禁欲方法更符合康德的尊重自主的义务。
