注意概率的必要性(为了自卫和其他先发制人的行动)

L. Alexander
{"title":"注意概率的必要性(为了自卫和其他先发制人的行动)","authors":"L. Alexander","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2909273","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this short essay I ask what must someone acting in defense of others believe and with what level of credence in order not to be culpable for so acting. I focus on defense of others to avoid the issue of excuse, as the defender of others is not acting out of fear for his own safety, a fear that might excuse the defensive acts of the victim of the feared attack. I focus on beliefs and levels of credence because no defender can know for certain the factors relevant to permissible defensive actions.","PeriodicalId":83257,"journal":{"name":"The San Diego law review","volume":"55 1","pages":"223"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Need to Attend to Probabilities (for Purposes of Self-Defense and Other Preemptive Actions)\",\"authors\":\"L. Alexander\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.2909273\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this short essay I ask what must someone acting in defense of others believe and with what level of credence in order not to be culpable for so acting. I focus on defense of others to avoid the issue of excuse, as the defender of others is not acting out of fear for his own safety, a fear that might excuse the defensive acts of the victim of the feared attack. I focus on beliefs and levels of credence because no defender can know for certain the factors relevant to permissible defensive actions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":83257,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The San Diego law review\",\"volume\":\"55 1\",\"pages\":\"223\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The San Diego law review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2909273\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The San Diego law review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2909273","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

在这篇短文中,我想问的是,一个为他人辩护的人必须相信什么,要有多大程度的信任,才能不因自己的行为而受到谴责。我专注于为他人辩护,以避免借口的问题,因为他人的捍卫者不是出于对自己安全的恐惧而采取行动,这种恐惧可能会原谅受害者的防御行为。我关注的是信念和信任水平,因为没有防守者可以确切地知道与允许的防守行动相关的因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The Need to Attend to Probabilities (for Purposes of Self-Defense and Other Preemptive Actions)
In this short essay I ask what must someone acting in defense of others believe and with what level of credence in order not to be culpable for so acting. I focus on defense of others to avoid the issue of excuse, as the defender of others is not acting out of fear for his own safety, a fear that might excuse the defensive acts of the victim of the feared attack. I focus on beliefs and levels of credence because no defender can know for certain the factors relevant to permissible defensive actions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Reply to 'How Foot Voting Enhances Political Freedom' Is There Hope for Change? The Evolution of Conceptions of 'Good' Corporate Governance Extending Miranda: Prohibition on Police Lies Regarding the Incriminating Evidence The Vindication of Good Over Evil: “Futile” Self-Defense The Case for Varying Standards of Proof
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1