Self-Defense, Forfeiture and Necessity

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

The thesis of this paper is that it is possible to explain why a culpable aggressor forfeits his right not to suffer the harm necessary to prevent his aggression if a killer forfeits his right to life. I argue that this strategy accounts also for the necessity restriction on self-defense. I respond to several objections, including the worry that it makes no sense to attempt a derivation of the relatively uncontroversial (aggressor’s forfeiture) from the highly controversial (killer’s forfeiture).

Details

Authors
Organisations
Research areas and keywords

Subject classification (UKÄ) – MANDATORY

  • Philosophy
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)335-358
Number of pages25
JournalPhilosophical Papers
Volume48
Issue number3
Early online date2019 Feb 6
Publication statusPublished - 2019 Nov
Publication categoryResearch
Peer-reviewedYes