Rights-Based Justifications for Self-Defense: Defending a Modified Unjust Threat Account

0Citations
Citations of this article
1Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

I defend a modified rights-based unjust threat account for morally justified killing in self-defense. Rights-based moral justifications for killing in self-defense presume that human beings have a right to defend themselves from unjust threats. An unjust threat account of self-defense says that this right is derived from an agent’s moral obligation to not pose a deadly threat to the defender. The failure to keep this moral obligation creates the moral asymmetry necessary to justify a defender killing the unjust threat in self-defense. I argue that the other rights-based approaches explored here are unfair to the defender because they require her to prove moral fault in the threat. But then I suggest that the unjust threat account should be modified so that where the threat is non-culpable or only partially culpable, the defender should seek to share the cost and risk with the threat in order for both parties to survive.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Ford, S. B. (2022). Rights-Based Justifications for Self-Defense: Defending a Modified Unjust Threat Account. International Journal of Applied Philosophy, 36(1), 49–65. https://doi.org/10.5840/ijap2023210172

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free