Max de GAYNESFORD, Université de Reading, Royaume-Uni

Justifications and excuses have their place where there is something untoward about a person’s behaviour that calls for defence. This talk sets out to challenge a basic assumption of theorists from Hobbes to Austin, Hart and Gardner: that if a defence counts as a justification, it cannot also be an excuse, and vice versa. Justifications and excuses certainly differ, but they can conjoin. There is strong evidence of this, not only in ordinary thought but in philosophically problematic cases. And there is evidence in legally problematic cases also—e.g. cases of justified blameworthiness, reasonable mistakes and provocation leading to loss of self-control. These cases in particular suggest that correcting the basic assumption could have significant practical benefits.