Brief Summary: The Ethics Of War
Just War
PHI 208
Dr. David Tredinnick
May 5, 2014
Just War
War is an organized and often prolonged conflict that is carried out by states or non-state actors. It is characterized by extreme violence, social disruption and economic destruction. War should be understood as an actual, intentional and widespread-armed conflict between political communities, and, therefore, is defined as a form of political violence or intervention. The set of techniques used by a group to carry out war is known as warfare. Ethics of war can be a sensitive and debated subject. I believe that there are times when a war is justified. Three topics I would like to discuss are: what kind of virtues do people in the military …show more content…
need to have, are there times when a soldier’s virtues or duties may conflict, and what are some circumstances that would make a war just or unjust? Soldiers in the military need to hold certain types of virtues in order to maintain a sense of moral and ethical standard. If Soldiers do not have certain types of virtues, they may commit war crimes during the heat of battle. The actions of the Soldiers will be dictated by their training and ethics that were taught by the military. There will be many times when a soldier will be placed in a position to make a sound ethical decision with the possibility of no superiors around to ensure standards are met. “Utilitarianism gives primacy to a concern with what will happen. Absolutism gives primacy to a concern with what one is doing” (Nagel, 1972). One’s own self-inherent belief could take over in the heat of battle and they could have a utilitarian core belief or believe in absolutism. Aristotle stated, “A temperate person is moderate and has self-control. This person is able to control his or her emotions through reason and does not indulge in the extreme” (Mosser, 2013). The Abu Gihraib prison incident in Iraq proved to be a horrific event. Obviously the Solders that worked in the Abu Gihraib prison did not possess Aristotle’s qualities. A good example of Soldiers holding on to their virtues in very difficult times is Colonel Nickelson. In the movie clip, “Bridge over a river Kwai,” Colonel Nickelson and his British Soldiers were captured by the Japanese and were placed at Camp in Burma in 1943. The British Soldiers were forced to build a bridge over the Kwai River. Colonel Nickelson instructed his Soldiers to build a quality bridge and was questioned by someone as to why should the British Soldiers build a quality bridge for the enemy. Colonel Nickelson said that by building a quality bridge, the Soldiers would maintain their discipline, boost morale, and continue structured ability of working together and following orders (Wingclips). Colonel Nickelson kept the direction of his Soldiers in the right direction even through times of adversity. There may be times during the war when a Soldier 's virtues may conflict.
The acts of war
Involve killing and this could lead to an internal conflict with the Soldiers moral values. Not too
many people can kill someone else without feeling some guilt whether it happens immediately or
later in time when they have time to pause and think about what happened. There may be times when a leader could give an order that is morally unethical. It is the Soldiers discretion as to whether or not to follow those orders. The military has its own set of laws that must be followed and there are also rules of war that must be followed. The Soldier can decide to disobey the immoral orders at risk of being punished if the orders end up being permissible. Ethical training and counseling will help ensure that the Soldiers internal conflict is addressed. “Moral relativism is often characterized in terms of cultures, and cultural anthropologists have identified many practices that contrast, and even conflict” (Mosser, 2013). The United States Military is made …show more content…
up
of many people from many different backgrounds. This might cause some moral decisions to be
made but the US Soldiers all have the same training with the same ethical goals to meet.
“War is a phenomenon which occurs only between political communities, defined as those entities which either are states or intend to become states in order to allow for civil war” (Orend, 2008). Many will question what makes a war justified or unjustified. This question can always be debated from both the participants of the war and the bystanders who look at the cause of the war. “War is a brutal and ugly enterprise. Yet it remains central to human history and social change” (Orend, 2008). “What constitutes a just or unjust resort to armed force is disclosed to us by the rules of jus ad bellum. Just war theory contends that, for any resort to war to be justified, a political community, or state, must fulfill each and every one of the following six requirements: Just cause, Right intention, Proper authority and declaration, Last resort, Probability of success, and Proportionality” (Orend, 2008). An example is when the United States invaded Iraq while searching or Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). This war started in 2003 and 11 years later, the topic is still discussed on whether that war was justified or not justified. At the time the war started, the United States was still reeling from the destruction and devastation that was inflicted on the World Trade Center on 9/11. The American society rallied and supported the invasion of Iraq because of the painful emotions that was felt. There are times when a war is required because of a tyrant’s act against a society that was not warranted. Iraq had no purpose to invade Kuwait except for a hostile take over and acquire their oil rich land. They didn’t really have the means to defend themselves, so this is why the US entered the war against Iraq. The Americans did not want to see another 9/11 happen again. War is an organized and often prolonged conflict that is carried out by states or non-state actors.
It is characterized by extreme violence, social disruption and economic destruction. War should be understood as an actual, intentional and widespread-armed conflict between political communities, and, therefore, is defined as a form of political violence or intervention. Rules need to be in place because of the unpredictable violent nature of a war. This is where ethics comes into play. The purpose of war ethics is to decide what is right or wrong both for individuals or Nations. Ethics will also lead to debates on public policy, government, and individual action. Some questions that arise are: Do people in the military need to possess certain virtues? Yes, there will be times when a Soldiers moral ethics will be challenged. Aristotle stated, “A temperate person is moderate and has self-control”. These are important and needed qualities in a Soldier. Are there times during the war when Soldiers virtues will be conflicted? Yes, “Moral relativism is often characterized in terms of cultures, and cultural anthropologists have identified many practices that contrast, and even conflict” (Mosser, 2013). The United States military is comprised of many Soldiers with different ethnic and cultural backgrounds. Because of this, there will be many challenges that will be met on the quest for one common goal. When is a war justified or unjustified? That question will most
always be debated. The world is made up of many cultures and each culture has their own set of beliefs. Moral isolationism will cause each society to live by different set of beliefs. War ethics also leads to formal codes of war such as the Geneva Convention, and the implementation of rules and punishment of soldiers and other war crimes. These are some issues that arise during war and will be debated world wide as long as war exists.
References
Crapo, R. H. (2013). Cultural anthropology. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education.
Maher, Robin M. Human Rights. Fall96, Vol. 23 Issue 4, p12-15. 4p. 4 Black and White Photographs
McGinn, Daniel; Halpert, Julie Edelson; Weingarten, Tara; Raymond, Joan. Newsweek. 12/14/1998, Vol. 132 Issue 24, p60. 3p. 3 Color Photographs, 1 Graph.
Nagel, T. (1972). War and massacre. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1(2), 123-144. Retrieved from the JSTOR database.
Orend, B. (2008). War. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/war/
Wingclips. (n.d.). The bridge on the river Kwai [Movie clip]. Retrieved from http://www.wingclips.com/movie-clips/the-bridge-on-the-river-kwai/the-best-bridge
PHI 208
Dr. David Tredinnick
May 5, 2014
Just War
War is an organized and often prolonged conflict that is carried out by states or non-state actors. It is characterized by extreme violence, social disruption and economic destruction. War should be understood as an actual, intentional and widespread-armed conflict between political communities, and, therefore, is defined as a form of political violence or intervention. The set of techniques used by a group to carry out war is known as warfare. Ethics of war can be a sensitive and debated subject. I believe that there are times when a war is justified. Three topics I would like to discuss are: what kind of virtues do people in the military …show more content…
need to have, are there times when a soldier’s virtues or duties may conflict, and what are some circumstances that would make a war just or unjust? Soldiers in the military need to hold certain types of virtues in order to maintain a sense of moral and ethical standard. If Soldiers do not have certain types of virtues, they may commit war crimes during the heat of battle. The actions of the Soldiers will be dictated by their training and ethics that were taught by the military. There will be many times when a soldier will be placed in a position to make a sound ethical decision with the possibility of no superiors around to ensure standards are met. “Utilitarianism gives primacy to a concern with what will happen. Absolutism gives primacy to a concern with what one is doing” (Nagel, 1972). One’s own self-inherent belief could take over in the heat of battle and they could have a utilitarian core belief or believe in absolutism. Aristotle stated, “A temperate person is moderate and has self-control. This person is able to control his or her emotions through reason and does not indulge in the extreme” (Mosser, 2013). The Abu Gihraib prison incident in Iraq proved to be a horrific event. Obviously the Solders that worked in the Abu Gihraib prison did not possess Aristotle’s qualities. A good example of Soldiers holding on to their virtues in very difficult times is Colonel Nickelson. In the movie clip, “Bridge over a river Kwai,” Colonel Nickelson and his British Soldiers were captured by the Japanese and were placed at Camp in Burma in 1943. The British Soldiers were forced to build a bridge over the Kwai River. Colonel Nickelson instructed his Soldiers to build a quality bridge and was questioned by someone as to why should the British Soldiers build a quality bridge for the enemy. Colonel Nickelson said that by building a quality bridge, the Soldiers would maintain their discipline, boost morale, and continue structured ability of working together and following orders (Wingclips). Colonel Nickelson kept the direction of his Soldiers in the right direction even through times of adversity. There may be times during the war when a Soldier 's virtues may conflict.
The acts of war
Involve killing and this could lead to an internal conflict with the Soldiers moral values. Not too
many people can kill someone else without feeling some guilt whether it happens immediately or
later in time when they have time to pause and think about what happened. There may be times when a leader could give an order that is morally unethical. It is the Soldiers discretion as to whether or not to follow those orders. The military has its own set of laws that must be followed and there are also rules of war that must be followed. The Soldier can decide to disobey the immoral orders at risk of being punished if the orders end up being permissible. Ethical training and counseling will help ensure that the Soldiers internal conflict is addressed. “Moral relativism is often characterized in terms of cultures, and cultural anthropologists have identified many practices that contrast, and even conflict” (Mosser, 2013). The United States Military is made …show more content…
up
of many people from many different backgrounds. This might cause some moral decisions to be
made but the US Soldiers all have the same training with the same ethical goals to meet.
“War is a phenomenon which occurs only between political communities, defined as those entities which either are states or intend to become states in order to allow for civil war” (Orend, 2008). Many will question what makes a war justified or unjustified. This question can always be debated from both the participants of the war and the bystanders who look at the cause of the war. “War is a brutal and ugly enterprise. Yet it remains central to human history and social change” (Orend, 2008). “What constitutes a just or unjust resort to armed force is disclosed to us by the rules of jus ad bellum. Just war theory contends that, for any resort to war to be justified, a political community, or state, must fulfill each and every one of the following six requirements: Just cause, Right intention, Proper authority and declaration, Last resort, Probability of success, and Proportionality” (Orend, 2008). An example is when the United States invaded Iraq while searching or Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). This war started in 2003 and 11 years later, the topic is still discussed on whether that war was justified or not justified. At the time the war started, the United States was still reeling from the destruction and devastation that was inflicted on the World Trade Center on 9/11. The American society rallied and supported the invasion of Iraq because of the painful emotions that was felt. There are times when a war is required because of a tyrant’s act against a society that was not warranted. Iraq had no purpose to invade Kuwait except for a hostile take over and acquire their oil rich land. They didn’t really have the means to defend themselves, so this is why the US entered the war against Iraq. The Americans did not want to see another 9/11 happen again. War is an organized and often prolonged conflict that is carried out by states or non-state actors.
It is characterized by extreme violence, social disruption and economic destruction. War should be understood as an actual, intentional and widespread-armed conflict between political communities, and, therefore, is defined as a form of political violence or intervention. Rules need to be in place because of the unpredictable violent nature of a war. This is where ethics comes into play. The purpose of war ethics is to decide what is right or wrong both for individuals or Nations. Ethics will also lead to debates on public policy, government, and individual action. Some questions that arise are: Do people in the military need to possess certain virtues? Yes, there will be times when a Soldiers moral ethics will be challenged. Aristotle stated, “A temperate person is moderate and has self-control”. These are important and needed qualities in a Soldier. Are there times during the war when Soldiers virtues will be conflicted? Yes, “Moral relativism is often characterized in terms of cultures, and cultural anthropologists have identified many practices that contrast, and even conflict” (Mosser, 2013). The United States military is comprised of many Soldiers with different ethnic and cultural backgrounds. Because of this, there will be many challenges that will be met on the quest for one common goal. When is a war justified or unjustified? That question will most
always be debated. The world is made up of many cultures and each culture has their own set of beliefs. Moral isolationism will cause each society to live by different set of beliefs. War ethics also leads to formal codes of war such as the Geneva Convention, and the implementation of rules and punishment of soldiers and other war crimes. These are some issues that arise during war and will be debated world wide as long as war exists.
References
Crapo, R. H. (2013). Cultural anthropology. San Diego, CA: Bridgepoint Education.
Maher, Robin M. Human Rights. Fall96, Vol. 23 Issue 4, p12-15. 4p. 4 Black and White Photographs
McGinn, Daniel; Halpert, Julie Edelson; Weingarten, Tara; Raymond, Joan. Newsweek. 12/14/1998, Vol. 132 Issue 24, p60. 3p. 3 Color Photographs, 1 Graph.
Nagel, T. (1972). War and massacre. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 1(2), 123-144. Retrieved from the JSTOR database.
Orend, B. (2008). War. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/war/
Wingclips. (n.d.). The bridge on the river Kwai [Movie clip]. Retrieved from http://www.wingclips.com/movie-clips/the-bridge-on-the-river-kwai/the-best-bridge