In sum, the ordinary person's view, as Bradley presents it, is Aristotelian: for the purposes of determining moral responsibility an act has to be the agent's in that its origin (arche) lies with or in the agent in some sense and the agent must not be acting under coercion or in a state of non-culpable ignorance.
IV contrast agent must not be administered during the low-dose CT, used for attenuation correction purposes, because of its potential influence on SUV calculation.
Agent B must not be the scapegoat: if his actions were sanctioned, the person at the top of the chain of command who sanctioned those actions must be held responsible and accountable.
A number of incompatibilists have maintained that a free decision (or some event internal to such a decision) must be caused by the agent, and it must not be the case that either what the agent causes or the agent's causing that event is causally determined by prior events.
It is accepted that the individual, the agents who perpetrate and experience violence must not be forgotten [ 12], but the challenge moving forward is to work from a population health perspective to prevent structural violence against women.
Third, that watchdog must not be an agent of the very companies it's supposed to be policing.
As the diagnostic advantages of these techniques are being researched [ 1- 7] increased knowledge has lead to a dramatic increase in the use of intravascular iodinated contrast agents again, and their potential side effects must not be forgotten in routine clinical practice.
A similar approach must not be allowed to govern the research agenda for generic agents.
The terms 'action' and 'operation' must not be understood in their usual sense, which involves a human agent.
The electrode surfaces must not be roughened.
