|Appears in Collections:||Law and Philosophy Journal Articles|
|Title:||Necessity and Liability: On an Honour-Based Justification for Defensive Harming|
|Citation:||Bowen J (2016) Necessity and Liability: On an Honour-Based Justification for Defensive Harming, Journal of Practical Ethics, 4 (2), pp. 79-93.|
|Abstract:||This paper considers whether victims can justify what appears to be unnecessary defensive harming by reference to an honour-based justification. I argue that such an account faces serious problems: the honour-based justification cannot permit, first,defensiveharming, and second,substantialunnecessary harming. Finally, I suggest that, if the purpose of the honour based justification is expressive, an argument must be given to demonstrate why harming threateners, as opposed to opting for a non-harmful alternative, is the most effective means of affirming one’s honour. Along the way, I also suggest why I think thatinternalismabout the constraints on defensive harming (the view that the satisfaction of the necessity constraint is a necessity condition of a threatener’s liability) is correct. Most importantly, externalism implies that threateners can be liable to suffer gratuitous harm. I take this to be an unattractive consequence of the view.|
|Rights:||This article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported licence. The full text of the licence is available at: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/legalcode|
This item is protected by original copyright
Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact email@example.com providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.