Class Notes (1,100,000)
CA (630,000)
UTSG (50,000)
PHL (1,000)
Lecture 16

LEC16 – Discrimination Nov 3 2009

Course Code
Tom Hurka

This preview shows half of the first page. to view the full 2 pages of the document.
PHL378: War and Morality
LEC16 Discrimination
Nov, 3rd, 2009
! combatants are moral targets and non-combatants are not
! this is b/c while everyone started off with rights to not be killed some ppl lost their rights
! soldiers lose right to be killed but also gain right to kill other soldiers
! but moral status of civilians do not change
! boxer analogy
! pg. 135
! soldiers can only lose their rights through some act of their own during war time
! pg. 136: one act is by fighting (threatening the other side)
! materially non-innocent vs. morally non-innocent
! materially: posing physical threat; even conscripts are materially non-innocent
! morally: no material threat, but morally guilty
! traditional view holds
! pg. 145
! soldiers are liable to be killed b/c they volunteer, and they are materially non-innocent
! denies that soldiers on both sides are morally equal
! legitimate targets are only unjust side and not just side (soldiers)
! pg.1: challange jus in bello is independent of jus ad bellum
! pg.28-29: in bello proportionality
! relevant goods has to be the goods from the just causes, hence the unjust side by virtue of
not having a just cause, cannot have the relevant goods to be used in proportionality
! soldiers fighting on just side are permitted to kill soldiers on the unjust side
! pg. 25 challenges the material non-innocent criteria giving justification to soldiers able to attack
soldiers regardless of which side they are on (just / unjust)
! an aggressive person cannot claim self defence when they themself initiated the harmful
! Waltzer pg.128: recognize this objection and responds that the military situation is different
than the bank robber, because bank robbers made decision, but soldiers are subject to
manipulation, deceit, patriotism
! McMann pg.25: the manipulation, deceit and patriotism are excuses and not justifications
you are morally liable to be killed in war is if you are morally responsible for some
wrongful action
! 1st part of Mcmann's view: just combatants retain all their right while unjust side loses their
! unjust combatants are allowed to attack just combatants if the just combatants attack
! nonresponsible attackers
! pg. 31: implacable pursuer
! mad scientist plants device in third party which controls her to kill you
! pursuer is non-responsible threat, hence you are not permitted to kill her
! Evil twin
! you have evil twin brother who is chasing after some person A with intent to kill and is
threat to their life
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version