PHILOS 1B03 Lecture Notes - Jus Ad Bellum, Just War Theory, J. Walter Thompson

9 views3 pages
Published on 12 Apr 2013
School
McMaster University
Department
Philosophy
Course
PHILOS 1B03
Professor
Just War Theory Continued April 8, 2013
JWT
- A war is just if it satisfies conditions
- These conditions are divided into three parts
- Jus ad bellum
- Jus in bello
- Jus post bellum
- Some actions are considered intrinsically wrong
- E.g. targeting non-combatants
- Other actions must be assessed on consequentialist grounds
- E.g. Good consequences can justify some collateral grounds
Political Realism (Moral Nihilism)
- Ethics and Justice only apply to individuals in law- governed states
- States exist in a situation similar to a Hobbesian state of nature
- Relations between states are (or ought to be governed by self interest)
Political Realism War
- War is neither ethical nor unethical
- Decisions are (or ought to be) governed only by self interest
- Is this position plausible?
- It seems that discussions of ethics and justice are relevant to decision-
making in and assessment of war
Pacifism
Pacifism
Killing is always wrong Violence is always wrong
Personal (Private) Political (Anti-War) Both (Universal)
Anti- War Pacifism (AWP)
- Political violence (war) is always wrong
- Personal violence can be justified unethical?
- Is killing soldiers on the battlefield unethical?
- No: Self-defense
- No: Assumption of risk
Unlock document

This preview shows page 1 of the document.
Unlock all 3 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in

Document Summary

Just war theory continued april 8, 2013. A war is just if it satisfies conditions. These conditions are divided into three parts. Other actions must be assessed on consequentialist grounds. Ethics and justice only apply to individuals in law- governed states. States exist in a situation similar to a hobbesian state of nature. Decisions are (or ought to be) governed only by self interest. Relations between states are (or ought to be governed by self interest) It seems that discussions of ethics and justice are relevant to decision- making in and assessment of war. On the battlefield it is kill or be killed and since killing in sd is justified, killing soldiers on battlefield is justified. Sd only justified killing if there are no other options and you did not provoke attack. Much (most?) killing on battlefield is done relative (or extreme) safety. People who freely assume a risk only have themselves to blame if that risk is realized.

Get OneClass Grade+

Unlimited access to all notes and study guides.

YearlyMost Popular
75% OFF
$9.98/m
Monthly
$39.98/m
Single doc
$39.98

or

You will be charged $119.76 upfront and auto renewed at the end of each cycle. You may cancel anytime under Payment Settings. For more information, see our Terms and Privacy.
Payments are encrypted using 256-bit SSL. Powered by Stripe.