Abstract

In the paper the author analyzes the nature of intentional omission. The main aim is to demonstrate that neither intentions nor volitions, conceived of as mental items, play the role that they usually play when an action is performed. A remarkable consequence is drawn from this thesis: the cognitive grounds of responsibility for omissions relegate to a minor role the failure of forming the intention to act. Then a final issue is discussed: how the intention could be considered a requirement for dolus intentionalis in the case of omission.