Results for 'self-defence '

970 found
Order:
  1.  91
    Self-Defence, Just War, and a Reasonable Prospect of Success.Suzanne Uniacke - 2014 - In Helen Frowe & Gerald R. Lang, How We Fight: Ethics in War. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 62-74.
    The Just War principle of jus ad bellum explicitly requires a reasonable prospect of success; the prevailing view about personal self-defence is that it can be justified even if the prospect of success is low. This chapter defends the existence of this distinction and goes on to explore the normative basis of this difference between defensive war and self-defence and its implications. In particular, the chapter highlights the rationale of the ‘success condition’ within Just War thinking (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  2. Self-Defence and the Principle of Non-Combatant Immunity.Helen Frowe - 2011 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 8 (4):530-546.
    The reductivist view of war holds that the moral rules of killing in war can be reduced to the moral rules that govern killing between individuals. Noam Zohar objects to reductivism on the grounds that the account of individual self-defence that best supports the rules of war will inadvertently sanction terrorist killings of non-combatants. I argue that even an extended account of self-defence—that is, an account that permits killing at least some innocent people to save one's (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  3.  64
    Anticipatory self-defence and international law - a re-evaluation.Amos N. Guiora - unknown
    Traditional state v. state war is largely a relic. How then does a nation-state protect itself - preemptively - against the unseen enemy? Existing international law - the Caroline Doctrine, UN Charter Article 51, Security Council Resolutions 1368 and 1373 - do not provide sufficiently clear guidelines regarding when a state may take preemptive or anticipatory action against a non-state actor. This article proposes rearticulating international law to allow a state to act earlier provided sufficient intelligence is available. After examining (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. Public Shaming as Moral Self-Defence.James Edgar Lim - forthcoming - Social Theory and Practice.
    What, if anything, can justify public shaming? Philosophers who have written on this topic have pointed out the role of public shaming in enforcing valuable social norms. In this paper, I defend an alternate, supplementary justification for public shaming: as a form of moral self-defence. Moral self-defence is the defence of one’s moral standing – being recognized as an equal in the eyes of oneself and others – rather than the defence of one’s physical (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. Self-Defense, Necessity, and Punishment: A Philosophical Analysis.Uwe Steinhoff - 2019 - London and New York: Routledge.
    This book offers a philosophical analysis of the moral and legal justifications for the use of force. While the book focuses on the ethics self-defense, it also explores its relation to lesser evil justifications, public authority, the justification of punishment, and the ethics of war. Steinhoff’s account of the moral use of force covers a wide range of topics, including the nature of justification in general, the precise elements of different justifications, the logic of claim- and liberty-rights and of (...)
  6. Contagious disease and self-defence.T. M. Wilkinson - 2007 - Res Publica 13 (4):339-359.
    This paper gives a self-defence account of the scope and limits of the justified use of compulsion to control contagious disease. It applies an individualistic model of self-defence for state action and uses it to illuminate the constraints on public health compulsion of proportionality and using the least restrictive alternative. It next shows how a self-defence account should not be rejected on the basis of past abuses. The paper then considers two possible limits to (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  7. National Defence, Self Defence, and the Problem of Political Aggression.Seth Lazar - 2014 - In Cécile Fabre & Seth Lazar, The Morality of Defensive War. Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press. pp. 10-38.
    Wars are large-scale conflicts between organized groups of belligerents, which involve suffering, devastation, and brutality unlike almost anything else in human experience. Whatever one’s other beliefs about morality, all should agree that the horrors of war are all but unconscionable, and that warfare can be justified only if we have some compel- ling account of what is worth fighting for, which can justify contributing, as individu- als and as groups, to this calamitous endeavour. Although this question should obviously be central (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  8.  45
    Selfdefence and Forcing the Choice between Lives.Seumas Miller - 2008 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 9 (2):239-243.
    ABSTRACT In the standard case of justifiable killing in selfdefence one agent without provocation tries to kill a second agent and the second agent's only way to avoid death is to kill his attacker. It is widely accepted that such killings in selfdefence are morally justifiable, but it has proved difficult to show why this is so. Recently, Montague has put forward an account in terms of forcing a choice between lives, and Teichman has propounded a (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  9. A practical account of self-defence.Helen Frowe - 2010 - Law and Philosophy 29 (3):245-272.
    I argue that any successful account of permissible self- defence must be action-guiding, or practical . It must be able to inform people’s deliberation about what they are permitted to do when faced with an apparent threat to their lives. I argue that this forces us to accept that a person can be permitted to use self-defence against Apparent Threats: characters whom a person reasonably, but mistakenly, believes threaten her life. I defend a hybrid account of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   25 citations  
  10. Self-Defence and Innocence: Aggressors and Active Threats: Phillip Montague.Phillip Montague - 2000 - Utilitas 12 (1):62-78.
    Although people generally agree that innocent targets of culpable aggression are justified in harming the aggressors in self-defence, there is considerable disagreement regarding whether innocents are justified in defending themselves when their doing so would harm other innocent people. I argue in this essay that harming innocent aggressors and active innocent threats in self-defence is indeed justified under certain conditions, but that defensive actions in such cases are justified as permissions rather than as claim rights. This (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  11. Self-Defense as Claim Right, Liberty, and Act-Specific Agent-Relative Prerogative.Uwe Steinhoff - 2016 - Law and Philosophy 35 (2):193-209.
    This paper is not so much concerned with the question under which circumstances self-defense is justified, but rather with other normative features of self-defense as well as with the source of the self-defense justification. I will argue that the aggressor’s rights-forfeiture alone – and hence the liberty-right of the defender to defend himself – cannot explain the intuitively obvious fact that a prohibition on self-defense would wrong victims of attack. This can only be explained by conceiving (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  12.  41
    (1 other version)Self-Defence Against Multiple Threats.Kerah Gordon-Solmon - 2015 - New Content is Available for Journal of Moral Philosophy 14 (2):125-133.
    _ Source: _Page Count 9 If a threat is liable to be defensively killed, there is a defeasible justification for killing her. On certain prevailing assumptions about liability, which I accept, there are liability justifications for killing _any number_ of minimally responsible threats, each of whom would otherwise kill a single non-responsible victim. Absent harms to third parties, these justifications appear, counter-intuitively, to be undefeated. I argue that this counter-intuitive appearance is deceptive.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  13. 'Self-defence' and sovereignty: the reception and application of German political thought in England and Scotland, 1628-69.R. Friedeburg - 2002 - History of Political Thought 23 (2):238-265.
    Historians of political thought have begun to discover how contemporaries attempted to argue about armed conflict within the body politic without giving licence to anyone to escape order and subjection. During the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the concept of 'self-defence' became of overriding importance. English and Scottish interest in German affairs grew after the battle at the White Mountain in 1620. English and Scottish pamphleteers and writers subsequently began to recognize some of the argument concerning 'self-defence' (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14. Necessity in Self-Defense and War.Seth Lazar - 2012 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 40 (1):3-44.
    It is generally agreed that using lethal or otherwise serious force in self-defense is justified only when three conditions are satisfied: first, there are some grounds for the defender to give priority to his own interests over those of the attacker (whether because the attacker has lost the protection of his right to life, for example, or because of the defender’s prerogative to prefer himself to others); second, the harm used is proportionate to the threat thereby averted; third, the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   55 citations  
  15.  45
    Self-defence and National Defence [1].Frank de Roose - 1990 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 7 (2):159-168.
    ABSTRACT The paper begins with the suggestion that the aura of respectability that surrounds the notion of selfdefence may render that notion suitable as a rallying point for agreement on the ethical legitimacy of warfare. I first argue that self‐defensive killing by a person X is morally justified if three conditions obtain: (1) X is together with at least one other person in a situation in which one of the persons will be killed through actions of the (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  16.  42
    Permissible Killing: The Self-Defence Justification of Homicide.Suzanne Uniacke - 1994 - Cambridge University Press.
    Do individuals have a positive right of self-defence? And if so, what are the limits of this right? Under what conditions does this use of force extend to the defence of others? These are some of the issues explored by Dr Uniacke in this comprehensive 1994 philosophical discussion of the principles relevant to self-defence as a moral and legal justification of homicide. She establishes a unitary right of self-defence and the defence of (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   29 citations  
  17.  69
    Self‐defense, claim‐rights, and guns.Chetan Cetty - 2024 - The Philosphical Forum 55 (1):27-46.
    The right to self‐defense has played a major role in objections to gun regulation. Many contend that gun regulations threaten this right. While much philosophical discussion has focused on the relation between guns and this right, less attention has been paid to the argument for the right of self‐defense itself. In this article, I examine this argument. Gunrights defenders contend that the right of self‐defense is needed to explain why interferences in self‐defense are wrong. I propose (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18.  41
    Self-Defense for Theists.Blake Hereth - 2022 - Journal of Analytic Theology 10:246-276.
    According to Theistic Defensive Incompatibilism, common theistic commitments limit the scope or explanation of permissible self-defense. In this essay, I offer six original arguments for Theistic Defensive Incompatibilism. The first four arguments concern narrow proportionality: the requirement that the defensive harm inflicted on unjust threateners not exceed the harm they threaten. Hellism, Annihilationism, and Danteanism each imply that narrow proportionality is rarely satisfied, whereas Universalism implies that killing never harms. The final two arguments concern wide proportionality, or the requirement (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19.  87
    Self Defense.Terrance Tomkow - manuscript
    If there are rights there is surely a right to self-defense. But self-defense has proved very puzzling to rights theorists. The central puzzle has been called the "paradox of self-defense": If our right not to be harmed gives rise to our right to fight back, what happens to the attacker's right not to be harmed when the defender fights back? If the attacker somehow forfeits his right to self-defense because he is a bad actor, what do (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  20. State Legitimacy and Self-defence.Massimo Renzo - 2011 - Law and Philosophy 30 (5):575-601.
    In this paper I outline a theory of legitimacy that grounds the state’s right to rule on a natural duty not to harm others. I argue that by refusing to enter the state, anarchists expose those living next to them to the dangers of the state of nature, thereby posing an unjust threat. Since we have a duty not to pose unjust threats to others, anarchists have a duty to leave the state of nature and enter the state. This duty (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  21. Self-defense.Judith Jarvis Thomson - 1991 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 20 (4):283-310.
    But what if in order to save 0nc’s life one has to ki]1 another person? In some cases that is obviously permissible. In a case I will call Villainous Aggrcssor, you are standing in :1 meadow, innocently minding your own business, and 21 truck suddenly heads toward you. You try to sidestep the truck, but it tums as you tum. Now you can sec the driver: he is a mam you know has long hated you. What to do? You cannot (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   189 citations  
  22.  8
    Spiritual Self-Defense Practices in the "Bendung" Silat Start for Learners at the Mahaputra Pencak Silat Padepokan.Yuliawan Kasmahidayat, Ria Sabaria, Saian Badaruddin, Fitri Kurniati & Agus Sudirman - forthcoming - Evolutionary Studies in Imaginative Culture:168-176.
    This article discusses the origins, spiritual aspects, and development of Mahaputra Pencak Silat in Cintaraja village, Singaparna subdistrict. The main focus includes analysis of martial arts training which teaches how learners control their desires and impulses, as well as emphasizing the importance of self-defense in the life of a soldier. The research method was evaluated based on a historical and sociological approach where the discussion of the object was based on society and related to existing facts in Cintaraja village (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23. Self-Defense and the Necessity Condition.Uwe Steinhoff - manuscript
    Rights forfeiture or liability are not a path to the permissibility of self-defense (not even barring extraordinary circumstances), and the necessity condition is not intrinsic to justified self-defense. Rather, necessity in the context of justification must be distinguished from necessity in the context of rights forfeiture. While innocent aggressors only forfeit their right against necessary self-defense, culpable aggressors also forfeit, on grounds of a principle of reciprocity, certain rights against unnecessary self-defense. Yet, while culpable aggressors would (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  24. Self-Defense and Imminence.Uwe Steinhoff - manuscript
    This paper argues that there is a significant moral difference between force applied against (imminent) attackers on the one hand and force applied against “threatening” people who are not (imminent) attackers on the other. Given that there is such a difference, one should not blur the lines by using the term “self-defense” (understood as including other-defense) for both uses of force. Rather, only the former is appropriately called self-defense, while for the latter, following German legal terminology, the term (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  25.  84
    Digital Self-Defence: Why you Ought to Preserve Your Privacy for the Sake of Wrongdoers.Lauritz Aastrup Munch - 2022 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 25 (2):233-248.
    Most studies on the ethics of privacy focus on what others ought to do to accommodate our interest in privacy. I focus on a related but distinct question that has attracted less attention in the literature: When, if ever, does morality require us to safeguard our own privacy? While we often have prudential reasons for safeguarding our privacy, we are also, at least sometimes, morally required to do so. I argue that we, sometimes, ought to safeguard our privacy for the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  26. Self-Defense, Punishing Unjust Combatants and Justice in War.Steve Viner - 2010 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 4 (3):297-319.
    Some contemporary Just War theorists, like Jeff McMahan, have recently built upon an individual right of self-defense to articulate moral rules of war that are at odds with commonly accepted views. For instance, they argue that in principle combatants who fight on the unjust side ought to be liable to punishment on that basis alone. Also, they reject the conclusion that combatants fighting on both sides are morally equal. In this paper, I argue that these theorists overextend their (...)-defense analysis when it comes to the punishment of unjust combatants, and I show how in an important sense just and unjust combatants are morally equal. I contend that the individualistic and quid pro quo perspective of the self-defense analysis fails to consider properly how the international community, morally speaking, ought to treat combatants, and I set forth four elements of justice applicable to war, which, together, support the conclusion that in principle the international community should not take on the activity of punishing combatants solely for fighting on the unjust side. (shrink)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  27.  83
    ‘Death to Tyrants’: Self-Defence, Human Rights and Tyrannicide-Part II.Shannon K. Brincat - 2009 - Journal of International Political Theory 5 (1):75-93.
    This is the final part of a series of two papers that have examined the conceptual development of the philosophical justifications for tyrannicide. While Part I focused on the classical, medieval, and liberal justifications for tyrannicide, Part II aims to provide the tentative outlines of a contemporary model of tyrannicide in world politics. It is contended that a reinvigorated conception of self-defence, when coupled with the modern understanding of universal human rights, may provide the foundation for the normative (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  28.  38
    Logical Self-Defense.Ralph Henry Johnson & J. Anthony Blair - 1977 - Toronto, Canada: Mcgraw-Hill.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   155 citations  
  29.  30
    Self-defense: a philosophy of violence.Elsa Dorlin - 2022 - Brooklyn: Verso. Edited by Kieran Aarons.
    Philosopher Elsa Dorlin looks across the global history of the left to trace the politics, philosophy, and ethics of self defense.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  30. Killing, self-defense, and bad luck.Richard B. Miller - 2009 - Journal of Religious Ethics 37 (1):131-158.
    This essay argues on behalf of a hybrid theory for an ethics of self-defense understood as the Forfeiture-Partiality Theory. The theory weds the idea that a malicious attacker forfeits the right to life to the idea that we are permitted to prefer one's life to another's in cases of involuntary harm or threat. The theory is meant to capture our intuitions both about instances in which we can draw a moral asymmetry between attacker and victim and cases in which (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  31.  75
    Can Self-Defense Justify Punishment?Larry Alexander - 2013 - Law and Philosophy 32 (2-3):159-175.
    This piece is a review essay on Victor Tadros’s The Ends of Harm. Tadros rejects retributive desert but believes punishment can be justified instrumentally without succumbing to the problems of thoroughgoing consequentialism and endorsing using people as means. He believes he can achieve these results through extension of the right of self-defense. I argue that Tadros fails in this endeavor: he has a defective account of the means principle; his rejection of desert leads to gross mismatches of punishment and (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  32.  51
    War and Self-Defense: Some Reflections on the War on Gaza.Raef Zreik - 2024 - Analyse & Kritik 46 (1):191-213.
    This paper reflects on the current war on Gaza in 2024 that followed the Hamas attack on October 7th 2023, reading the events is a wider historical context. The paper has three main parts. In the first part, the paper argues against the fragmentation of the question of Palestine historically and geographically, arguing instead for the importance of the overall context of the conflict. The second part considers the issue of Palestinian resistance. How can the Palestinians resist occupation? This part (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  33.  22
    Defending Self-Defence.Fiona Leverick - 2007 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 27 (3):563-579.
  34.  43
    Against Self-Defense.Blake Hereth - 2017 - Social Theory and Practice 43 (3):613-635.
    The ethics of self-defense is dominated by the Orthodox View, which claims that at least some cases of self-defensive assault are permissible. I defend the radical view that there are no permissible instances of self-defensive assault. My argument proceeds as follows: Every permissible act of self-defensive assault could, in principle, have its permissibility be massively overdetermined. Such ‘super-permissible’ acts of assault are ones in which agents are objectively permitted to perform those acts in morally trivializing or (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  35. Self-defense, innocent aggressors, and the duty of martyrdom.Whitley Kaufman - 2010 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 91 (1):78-96.
    On the traditional doctrine of self-defense, defensive force is permissible not only against Culpable Aggressors but against Innocent Aggressors as well (for example, psychotic aggressors). Some moral philosophers have recently challenged this view, arguing that one may not harm innocent attackers because morality requires culpability as an essential condition of being liable to defensive force. This essay examines and rejects this challenge as both a violation of common sense and as insufficiently grounded in convincing reasons from moral theory.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  36. A New Societal Self-Defense Theory of Punishment—The Rights-Protection Theory.Hsin-Wen Lee - 2018 - Philosophia 46 (2):337-353.
    In this paper, I propose a new self-defense theory of punishment, the rights-protection theory. By appealing to the interest theory of right, I show that what we call “the right of self-defense” is actually composed of the right to protect our basic rights. The right of self-defense is not a single, self-standing right but a group of derivative rights justified by their contribution to the protection of the core, basic rights. Thus, these rights of self-defense (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  37.  96
    Self-Defense, Punishment and Forfeiture.David Alm - 2013 - Criminal Justice Ethics 32 (2):91-107.
    According to the self-defense view, the moral justification of punishment is derived from the moral justification of an earlier threat of punishment for an offense. According to the forfeiture view, criminals can justly be punished because they have forfeited certain rights in virtue of their crimes. The paper defends three theses about these two views. (1) The self-defense view is false because the right to threaten retaliation is not independent of the right to carry out that threat. (2) (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  38. Self-Defence and Just War.Suzanne Uniacke - 2002 - In Janssen Dieter & Quante Michael, Gerechte Kriege. Mentis-Verlag. pp. 64-78.
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  39. Self-defense, culpability, and distributive justice.Phillip Montague - 2010 - Law and Philosophy 29 (1):75-91.
    This paper has a threefold purpose: to question the adequacy of two familiar proposals for explaining the permissibility of harming others in self-defense, to suggest an alternative explanation, and to answer some objections to this latter explanation. By and large, discussions of the proposals whose adequacy I will question focus on what they imply about the permissibility of self-defense in controversial cases. I will argue here that the proposals themselves contain large and significant theoretical gaps. Accordingly, examining their (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  40. Self-Defence among Innocent People.Gerhard Øverland - 2005 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 2 (2):127-146.
    I explain the asymmetry between innocent aggressors and their victims, and attempt to separate justified and unjustified defensive force when both parties are innocent. I propose the principle of initiating behaviour, which states that: ‘In order for one person to be justified in using defensive force the other party must initiate the apparently threatening behaviour, but the defendant’s interpretation of that behaviour, as being threatening, would have to be reasonable.’ We can thereby maintain the view that there is a significant (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  41.  58
    Selfdefence Against the Innocent.Michael Clark - 2000 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 17 (2):145–155.
    Do we have the right to defend ourselves against innocent aggressors? If I amattacked in a lift by a knife‐wielding lunatic, may I kill or maim him to protect my own life? On one view the insane man’s plight is his bad luck and I am under no obligation to let it be transferred to me. On the opposing view it is my bad luck to be under attack and I have no right to transfer it to an innocent man (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  42. Innocence, self-defense and killing in war.Jeff McMahan - 1994 - Journal of Political Philosophy 2 (3):193–221.
  43.  10
    Self-defence and War.David Rodin - 1998
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  44. Implicit Bias, Self-Defence, and the Reasonable Person.Jules Holroyd & Federico Picinali - 2022 - In Matt Matravers & Claes Lernestedt, The Criminal Law's Person. Hart Publishing.
    The reasonable person standard is used in adjudicating claims of self-defence. In US law, an individual may use defensive force if her beliefs that a threat is imminent and that force is required are beliefs that a reasonable person would have. In English law, it is sufficient that beliefs in imminence and necessity are genuinely held; but the reasonableness of so believing is given an evidential role in establishing the genuineness of the beliefs. There is, of course, much (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  45.  53
    The Ethics of Self-Defense.Christian Coons & Michael Weber (eds.) - 2016 - New York, NY: Oxford University Press USA.
    The fifteen new essays collected in this volume address questions concerning the ethics of self-defense, most centrally when and to what extent the use of defensive force, especially lethal force, can be justified. Scholarly interest in this topic reflects public concern stemming from controversial cases of the use of force by police, and military force exercised in the name of defending against transnational terrorism. The contributors pay special attention to determining when a threat is liable to defensive harm, though (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  46. Proportionality in Self-Defense.Uwe Steinhoff - 2017 - The Journal of Ethics 21 (3):263-289.
    This article considers the proportionality requirement of the self-defense justification. It first lays bare the assumptions and the logic—and often illogic—underlying very strict accounts of the proportionality requirement. It argues that accounts that try to rule out lethal self-defense against threats to property or against threats of minor assault by an appeal to the supreme value of life have counter-intuitive implications and are untenable. Furthermore, it provides arguments demonstrating that there is not necessarily a right not to be (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  47. Rodin on Self-Defense and the "Myth" of National Self-Defense: A Refutation.Uwe Steinhoff - 2013 - Philosophia 41 (4):1017-1036.
    David Rodin denies that defensive wars against unjust aggression can be justified if the unjust aggression limits itself, for example, to the annexation of territory, the robbery of resources or the restriction of political freedom, but would endanger the lives, bodily integrity or freedom from slavery of the citizens only if the unjustly attacked state actually resisted the aggression. I will argue that Rodin's position is not correct. First, Rodin's comments on the necessity condition and its relation to an alleged (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  48. From self-defense to violent protest.Edmund Tweedy Flanigan - 2023 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 26 (7):1094-1118.
    It is an orthodoxy of modern political thought that violence is morally incompatible with politics, with the important exception of the permissible violence carried out by the state. The “commonsense argument” for permissible political violence denies this by extending the principles of defensive ethics to the context of state-subject interaction. This article has two aims: First, I critically investigate the commonsense argument and its limits. I argue that the scope of permissions it licenses is significantly more limited than its proponents (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  49.  11
    Self-Defense Against Conditional Threats.Luciano Venezia & Eduardo Rivera-López - 2025 - The Journal of Ethics 29 (1):63-83.
    The aim of this paper is twofold. First, we argue that killing a Conditional Threat usually involves an unnecessary act of self-defense, so killing this aggressor is usually morally impermissible. We defend this thesis by showing that this case is fundamentally similar to a case involving an Unconditional Threat in which the victim can flee to safety although this involves incurring a minor cost. Second, we analyze the thresholds of maximal harm that victims are required to bear before they (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  50.  40
    SelfDefence and the Right to Resist.Christopher J. Finlay - 2008 - International Journal of Philosophical Studies 16 (1):85 – 100.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
1 — 50 / 970