Just War Theory Obsolete Essay
The Just War Theory is obsolete in light of nuclear weaponry
The just war theory is concerned with ethically justifying war with acceptable warfare techniques (Moseley, 2009). It can be argued that in light of modern day nuclear power, the just war theory is obsolete. The central claim of this paper is that this notion is true; war is immoral and cannot be justified. To defend this claim, this paper will be taking a deontological approach and present counter arguments in favour of utilitarianism.
Immanuel Kant’s categorical imperative suggests three maxims which separate moral from immoral actions (Kant, 1981).The first aspect of this imperative states one can only act morally if the statement by which you are acting becomes universal law without contradiction and the consequences of such are logical (Kant, 1981). For example, if the statement ‘you ought not kill’ is put forward, the universal consequences are logical making it a moral statement. However, this statement is not true in war, especially in the case of nuclear warfare. Since this statement dictates an action must be universalized without contradiction, the concept and consequences of war become nonsensical and illogical due to the fact that anyone can murder anyone, not just in war and including yourself (Kant, 1981), making this just war theory obsolete. …show more content…
The above argument does not consider the moral paralysis that occurs when you have a duty to not kill but there is also a duty to protect you country, which questions Kant’s entire imperative. Jeremy Bentham argues that the end justifies the means and if there is a good will and humanizing measures, a war is justified by the total good outweighing the total war (Moseley, 2009). This is demonstrated by the principles of Jus As Bellum, a set of guidelines ensuring the greatest good comes from the least destruction thereby creating a just war (Dear,
The just war theory is concerned with ethically justifying war with acceptable warfare techniques (Moseley, 2009). It can be argued that in light of modern day nuclear power, the just war theory is obsolete. The central claim of this paper is that this notion is true; war is immoral and cannot be justified. To defend this claim, this paper will be taking a deontological approach and present counter arguments in favour of utilitarianism.
Immanuel Kant’s categorical imperative suggests three maxims which separate moral from immoral actions (Kant, 1981).The first aspect of this imperative states one can only act morally if the statement by which you are acting becomes universal law without contradiction and the consequences of such are logical (Kant, 1981). For example, if the statement ‘you ought not kill’ is put forward, the universal consequences are logical making it a moral statement. However, this statement is not true in war, especially in the case of nuclear warfare. Since this statement dictates an action must be universalized without contradiction, the concept and consequences of war become nonsensical and illogical due to the fact that anyone can murder anyone, not just in war and including yourself (Kant, 1981), making this just war theory obsolete. …show more content…
The above argument does not consider the moral paralysis that occurs when you have a duty to not kill but there is also a duty to protect you country, which questions Kant’s entire imperative. Jeremy Bentham argues that the end justifies the means and if there is a good will and humanizing measures, a war is justified by the total good outweighing the total war (Moseley, 2009). This is demonstrated by the principles of Jus As Bellum, a set of guidelines ensuring the greatest good comes from the least destruction thereby creating a just war (Dear,