Application of ethical theories Flashcards
Define the Just War theory
- JWT serves as a moral framework to determine the justifiability of military force, originating from the works of philosophers such as St. Augustine and St. Aquinas.
- It delineates three key categories: jus ad bellum, jus in bello, and jus post bellum, addressing moral considerations before, during, and after warfare.
Outline the origins of JWT
- Augustine drew on the existing Roman idea of justum bellum and the Old Testament tradition where wars on behalf of Israel and God were clearly commanded by God.
- Ambrose stipulated that war must only be waged by a legitimate governmental authority; it must be intended to restore peace and justice and a last resort.
- Aquinas drew these concepts together and listed right authority , just cause and just intention as the most important aspects.
Define and describe the categories of JWT
jus ad bellum: - justice in the decision to wage war
jus in bello: justice in the conduct of war
jus post bellum: justice in the ending of war
Outline the guidelines of jus ad bellum
- Just cause; can include to right a wrong , self defence , defending others
- Legitimate Authority
- Right Intention
- Likelihood of success
- Proportionality
- Last Resort
Outline the guidelines of jus in bello
- proportionality
- discrimination and non-combatant immunity
- obey all international laws on weapons prohibition
- benevolent quarantine
- no means mala in se
- no reprisals
Outline the guidelines of Jus post bellum
- Proportionality
- Discrimination
- Rights Vindication ( restoration of the rights of civilians
- Punishment
- Compensation
- Rehabilitation
Outline Old Testament views on JWT.
Judges 5:2-31 : “ so perish all your enemies, O Lord”
- rather than overt command to go to a war it is a response to those who sin.
Joshua 10:40 : ‘ Joshua spared no one, everyone was put to death’
- indiscriminate form of violence
Isaiah 2:4: ‘nation will not take up sword against nation , nor will they train for war anymore’
- uses futuristic tenses thus unaware of when this is applicable. However, some believe that it talks about ‘ the last of days’ referencing Parousia
Outline New Testament views on JWT
” For our struggle is not against flesh and blood (…) but against the spiritual forces of evil”
- focuses on overcoming the internal spiritual battle between sinful urges and acts of goodness rather than promoting acts of violence.
Outline Christian views which advocate for a peaceful approach to violence
Jesus’ sayings imply a pacifist (non-violent) approach:
- “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called Children of God” Matthew 5:9.
- “Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you”
- Jesus is seen as the new covenant. Due to his crucifixion and as the source of salvation, he emphasises an approach which allows for a close relationship with God.
Outline Christian views which permit violence
- Emperor Constantine believed that Jesus had appeared in a vision , where he was promised victory in battle , if he converted to Christianity. Thus violence can be seen as permissible in certain circumstances.
- Augustine says “ Christians make war with tears in their eyes”. Thus war is not encouraged but rather seen as permissible in times of necessity.
Give a Situation Ethics’ view on Just War Theory
Give a Natural Moralist view on Just War Theory
Give a Utilitarianist view on Just War theory
Summarise the events of the Iraq War. Include quotes.
- Bush and Blair claimed to have follow the conditions of Just War theory , arguing that it was a ‘ last resort’ and that there was ‘ just cause for the war’ due to a claim that Iraq possessed WMD
- This was despite the fact that there was none to be found , ultimately leading to the death of approx.1 million Iraqis.
- “to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger”
Summarise the events of the Hiroshima + Nagasaki bombing.
Give JWT views on the use of nuclear warfare
proportionality and principle of discrimination: both the short term and long term effects of using nuclear warfare cannot be justified due to their indiscriminate and unpredictable nature.
- JWT isn’t useful as in likelihood, the immediate use of a nuclear weapon would result in an inevitable escalation to the point of mutually assured destruction.
Give additional scholarly views on JWT
Noam Chomsky:
- criticises the selective application of just war principles, pointing out how powerful states tend to invoke them to legitimatise their military intervention while ignoring the principles when it comes to their own actions ( Iraq War).
- suggests that JWT can lead to moral blindness , as it focuses on abstract principles of justice while ignoring the concrete consequence of war on civilians and vulnerable populations.
Jean Elshtain:
- highlighted the moral ambiguity inherent in many conflicts due to the complexities of distinguishing between perpetrators and victims.
Richard Norman:
- explored the moral principles that govern the conduct of warfare within JWT.
- acknowledges the complexity of applying the principles in practice but argues that they provide valuable guidance for distinguishing between justified and unjustified uses of force.
Evaluate the success of the Just War Theory. Argue in support.
- With parameters , the wars are fought fairly. Link to Richard Norman.
CA: no certainty that the opposing side will follow these criteria as parameters are subjective and can be misused. link to Chomsky and moral blindness. - Primary aim is to bring about peace and avoid innocent civilians.
CA: we almost invariably cannot avoid innocent civilians as war always has collateral damage.
R: can the innocent civilians be clearly defined. Link to Elshtain. - Historical precedent due to its use in WWII.
- war is inevitable due to human nature and so at least JWT offers a constraint.
- aims to avoid retribution.
- it is a universal theory, but flexible , in that it grows and develops with the times.
Evaluate the success of the JWT. Argue Against
- focuses on justifying war rather than the prevention of the war entirely. Chomsky would argue that we should advocate for alternative approaches
- Nuclear weapons may mean the theory is redundant and not co-existent with modern times ( as principles of discrimination cannot be applied)
CA: still a need to consider their use through the moral framework which JWT offer
CA: Drone tech is advancing to make WMD more accurate
CA: not used in all wars; civil wars
R: Nonetheless, surely we should be focusing on the widescale impact of NW - hard to predict certain criteria : jus ad bellum
- goes against Jesus Teachings
CA: Emperor Constantine
R: shortcomings of religious experience - Walter Wink considers that Augustine’s teachings of the JWT led Christians on the wrong path. Believes that there can never be just reasons to go to war
Define pacifism.
- Pacifism is the opposition to war and violence due to the belief that it is immoral to harm others.
Give the four types of pacifism and define.
- absolute
- conditional
- selective
- active pacifism.
define absolute pacifism and give example of a proponent
- An absolute pacifist believes that it is never right to take part in war, even in self-defence.
- They think that the value of human life is so high that nothing can justify killing a person deliberately.
- hold this view as a basic moral or spiritual principle, without regard to the results of war or violence, however they could logically argue that violence always leads to worse results than non-violence.
- Einstein says “Nothing will end war unless the people themselves refuse to go to war.”
- Martin Luther King advocated for the rights of black people using peacful protests rather than resorting to violence.
define conditional pacifism
- Conditional pacifists are against war and violence in principle, but they accept that there may be circumstances when war will be less bad than the alternative (the lesser of two evils).
- usually base their moral code on Utilitarian principles - it’s the bad consequences that make it wrong to resort to war or violence.
- Bonhoeffer is an example.
Describe selective pacifsm
- Selective pacifists believe that it is a matter of degree, and only oppose wars involving weapons of mass destruction - nuclear or chemical and biological weapons
- either because of the uniquely devastating consequences of such weapons, or because a war that uses such weapons is not ‘winnable’.
