File Download
  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Helen Frowe’s ‘Practical Account of Self-Defence’: A Critique

TitleHelen Frowe’s ‘Practical Account of Self-Defence’: A Critique
Authors
KeywordsAction-guidingness
Helen Frowe
Justification
Objectivism
Self-defense
Issue Date2013
PublisherUniversitatea din Bucuresti, Facultatea de Filosofia. The Journal's web site is located at http://publicreason.ro/home
Citation
Public Reason, 2013, v. 5 n. 1, p. 87-96 How to Cite?
AbstractHelen Frowe has recently offered what she calls a 'practical' account of self-defense. Her account is supposed to be practical by being subjectivist about permissibility and objectivist about liability. I shall argue here that Frowe first makes up a problem that does not exist and then fails to solve it. To wit, her claim that objectivist accounts of permissibility cannot be action-guiding is wrong; and her own account of permissibility actually retains an objectivist (in the relevant sense) element. In addition, her attempt to restrict subjectivism primarily to 'urgent' situations like self-defense contradicts her own point of departure and is either incoherent or futile. Finally, the only actual whole-heartedly objectivist account she criticizes is an easy target; while those objectivist accounts one finds in certain Western European jurisdictions are immune to her criticisms. Those accounts are also clearly superior to hers in terms of action-guidingness.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/200815
ISSN
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.101

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorSteinhoff, UBen_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-08-21T07:02:19Z-
dc.date.available2014-08-21T07:02:19Z-
dc.date.issued2013en_US
dc.identifier.citationPublic Reason, 2013, v. 5 n. 1, p. 87-96en_US
dc.identifier.issn2065-7285-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/200815-
dc.description.abstractHelen Frowe has recently offered what she calls a 'practical' account of self-defense. Her account is supposed to be practical by being subjectivist about permissibility and objectivist about liability. I shall argue here that Frowe first makes up a problem that does not exist and then fails to solve it. To wit, her claim that objectivist accounts of permissibility cannot be action-guiding is wrong; and her own account of permissibility actually retains an objectivist (in the relevant sense) element. In addition, her attempt to restrict subjectivism primarily to 'urgent' situations like self-defense contradicts her own point of departure and is either incoherent or futile. Finally, the only actual whole-heartedly objectivist account she criticizes is an easy target; while those objectivist accounts one finds in certain Western European jurisdictions are immune to her criticisms. Those accounts are also clearly superior to hers in terms of action-guidingness.-
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherUniversitatea din Bucuresti, Facultatea de Filosofia. The Journal's web site is located at http://publicreason.ro/home-
dc.relation.ispartofPublic Reasonen_US
dc.rightsCreative Commons: Attribution 3.0 Hong Kong License-
dc.subjectAction-guidingness-
dc.subjectHelen Frowe-
dc.subjectJustification-
dc.subjectObjectivism-
dc.subjectSelf-defense-
dc.titleHelen Frowe’s ‘Practical Account of Self-Defence’: A Critiqueen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.emailSteinhoff, UB: ustnhoff@hkucc.hku.hken_US
dc.identifier.authoritySteinhoff, UB=rp00610en_US
dc.description.naturepublished_or_final_version-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-84891940359-
dc.identifier.hkuros234250en_US
dc.identifier.volume5en_US
dc.identifier.issue1en_US
dc.identifier.spage87en_US
dc.identifier.epage96en_US
dc.publisher.placeRomania-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats