Journal of Moral Philosophy 2 (2):127-146 (2005)
AbstractI 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 relation between an act being justified and which party ought eventually to be given priority in a conflict situation. If we know that an act is justified, we know that we have to give preference to its agent when there is a choice between imposing equal harm on him or her and his or her victim
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
Killing the Innocent in Self-Defense.Michael Otsuka - 1994 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 23 (1):74-94.
Self-Defense and the Problem of the Innocent Attacker.Jeff McMahan - 1994 - Ethics 104 (2):252-290.
Citations of this work
Why We Ought to Be (Reasonable) Subjectivists About Justification.Andrew Botterell - 2007 - Criminal Justice Ethics 26 (1):36-58.
Similar books and articles
Retributivism and the Inadvertent Punishment of the Innocent.Larry Alexander - 1983 - Law and Philosophy 2 (2):233 - 246.
On Disproportionate Force and Fighting in Vain.Gerhard Øverland - 2011 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 41 (2):235-261.
Self‐Defence Against the Innocent.Michael Clark - 2000 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 17 (2):145–155.
Unconscious Transference' Can Be an Instance of 'Change Blindness.Deborah Davis, Elizabeth F. Loftus, Samuel Vanous & Michael Cucciare - unknown
Self-Defence and the Principle of Non-Combatant Immunity.Helen Frowe - 2011 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 8 (4):530-546.