Philosophers writing about proportionality in self-defense and war will often assume that defensive agents have full knowledge about the threat that they face and the defensive options available to them. But no actual defensive agents possess this kind of knowledge. How, then, should we make proportionality decisions under uncertainty? The natural answer is that we should move from comparing the harm we will do with the good we will achieve to comparing expected harm with expected good. I argue that this simple calculation is flawed, and I begin to develop a more sophisticated account of “subjective proportionality.”

中文翻译：

---

主观比例

写自卫和战争中的相称性的哲学家通常会假设防御代理人对他们面临的威胁和他们可用的防御选择有充分的了解。但是没有真正的防御特工拥有这种知识。那么，我们应该如何在不确定的情况下做出比例决定？自然的答案是，我们应该从比较我们将造成的伤害与我们将实现的好处转向比较预期的伤害和预期的好处。我认为这个简单的计算是有缺陷的，我开始对“主观比例”进行更复杂的解释。