Justifying Harm

Ethics 122 (1):74-110 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this article, I develop a general explanatory model of the liability and lesser evil justifications of harm. Despite their respective provenance in consequentialist and deontological ethics, both justifications are, at root, rich forms of the proportionality relationship between a shared set of underlying normative variables. The nature of the proportionality relationship, and the conditions under which it operates, differ between the two forms of justification. The article explores these differences in detail and the implications they have for the justification of self-defense and war.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,225

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-12-09

Downloads
275 (#98,145)

6 months
20 (#145,561)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

David Rodin
Oxford University

Citations of this work

National Defence, Self Defence, and the Problem of Political Aggression.Seth Lazar - 2014 - In Cécile Fabre & Seth Lazar (eds.), The Morality of Defensive War. Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press. pp. 10-38.

View all 42 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Proportionality in the Morality of War.Thomas Hurka - 2004 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 33 (1):34-66.
Innocence, self-defense and killing in war.Jeff McMahan - 1994 - Journal of Political Philosophy 2 (3):193–221.
Killing the Innocent in Self‐Defense.Michael Otsuka - 1994 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 23 (1):74-94.

View all 9 references / Add more references