Which of the following is a defense against the tort of negligence?

Contributory negligence is indeed a valid defense against the tort of negligence. This defense arises when the plaintiff's own negligence contributes to the harm they suffered. In jurisdictions that recognize contributory negligence, if the plaintiff is found to be partially at fault, their ability to recover damages may be reduced or even eliminated, depending on the extent of their contribution to the incident. This principle acknowledges that both parties may share responsibility in a negligence case, and it serves to mitigate the liability of the defendant based on the plaintiff's own actions.

In contrast, strict liability pertains to situations where a party is held liable for damages without fault, often in cases involving inherently dangerous activities or defective products. Harassment is not related to negligence but rather focuses on wrongful conduct that causes distress or harm in a different legal context. Intentional torts involve deliberate actions that cause harm, which are distinct from negligence that typically arises from carelessness or unintentional acts. Therefore, contributory negligence remains the recognized defense in this context related to negligence claims.