Discussion Club is a lecture series hosted by the Sage School of Philosophy

A Subjective Standard of Reasonableness for Self-Defense?

Marcia Baron, Indiana University, Bloomington

What I’ll present comes from a book manuscript having to do with the distinction between subjective and objective standards of reasonableness, particularly in connection with self-defense. I try both to clarify the distinction and to argue that an objective standard properly understood, properly articulated, and properly applied is just fine. However, in the material that I will present at Cornell, I take seriously the position of someone who favors a subjective standard, and who wants to find as viable a subjective standard as possible.

 I motivate that position via a case that cannot count as justified self-defense on an objective standard, and which may for that reason lead some to favor a subjective standard. After explaining briefly one obvious alternative—treating the person as partially or fully excused—and then presenting another approach, suggested by Arthur Ripstein, I’ll devote the rest of my talk to trying to figure out how a subjective standard at its best might go, a subjective standard that would facilitate treating this and relevantly similar cases as justified self-defense. This is not something I am endorsing. I am considering it to draw attention to the challenges for anyone who wants to come up with a plausible subjective standard, and hopefully to advance the debate concerning standards of reasonableness.