Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Duty and Liability.Victor Tadros - 2012 - Utilitas 24 (2):259-277.
    In his recent book, Killing in War, Jeff McMahan sets out a number of conditions for a person to be liable to attack, provided the attack is used to avert an objectively unjust threat: (1) The threat, if realized, will wrongfully harm another; (2) the person is responsible for creating the threat; (3) killing the person is necessary to avert the threat, and (4) killing the person is a proportionate response to the threat. The present article focuses on McMahan's second (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations  
  • Who is Morally Liable to be Killed in War. [REVIEW]J. McMahan - 2011 - Analysis 71 (3):544-559.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   31 citations  
  • Killing Minimally Responsible Threats.Saba Bazargan - 2014 - Ethics 125 (1):114-136.
    Minimal responsibility threateners are epistemically justified but mistaken in thinking that imposing a nonnegligible risk on others is permissible. On standard accounts, an MRT forfeits her right not to be defensively killed. I propose an alternative account: an MRT is liable only to the degree of harm equivalent to what she risks causing multiplied by her degree of responsibility. Harm imposed on the MRT above that amount is justified as a lesser evil, relative to allowing the MRT to kill her (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   29 citations  
  • Desert and Avoidability in Self-Defense.John Gardner & François Tanguay-Renaud - 2011 - Ethics 122 (1):111-134.
    Jeff McMahan rejects the relevance of desert to the morality of self-defense. In Killing in War he restates his rejection and adds to his reasons. We argue that the reasons are not decisive and that the rejection calls for further attention, which we provide. Although we end up agreeing with McMahan that the limits of morally acceptable self-defense are not determined by anyone’s deserts, we try to show that deserts may have some subsidiary roles in the morality of self-defense. We (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Defense.Kai Draper - 2009 - Philosophical Studies 145 (1):69 - 88.
    This paper is an exploration of the nature of what is perhaps the most widely recognized justification for inflicting harm on human beings: the appeal to defense (self-defense and other-defense). I develop and defend a rights-based account of the appeal to defense that takes into account whether and to what degree both the aggressor and his potential victim are morally responsible for the relevant threat. However, unlike most extant rights-based accounts, mine is not a forfeiture account. That is, I do (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations