Abstract Chapter 7 investigates what I call ‘subjective proportionality’: how we should make proportionality calculations under uncertainty. The chapter takes the idea that under uncertainty we should compare expected harm with expected good as its starting point. The author argues that this simple, and compelling, approach is flawed, since it cannot properly account for the moral significance of intentions, and it cannot properly account for the significance of whether an outcome will be objectively proportionate or disproportionate. The author advocates a new approach to subjective proportionality. First, we must see whether the outcomes that are intended are objectively proportionate. Second, looking at the full range of possible outcomes, we must test whether the good, objectively proportionate, outcomes are worth risking the bad, objectively disproportionate, outcomes.