Preview

Utilitarianism In Military

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
954 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Utilitarianism In Military
The struggle to define right and wrong is one centuries old and continues to be relevant day by day. In issues concerning the military and acts of war, this struggle takes on new meaning. The ethics of military orders quickly become a problem when studying right and wrong. The problem ethics raise concerning military orders is solved using the theory of utilitarianism, and though opposed by ethical relativism, in this situation utilitarianism is the answer. The study of morality is called ethics. Morality is made up of the acceptable limits that the group “society” or individual has regarding good and evil and right and wrong. Ethics is one of the three divisions of Philosophy that “tries to determine which things are morally good …show more content…
The laws of war clearly state the action must be taken as a reaction and be able to be considered justified self-defense, or an act to neutralize the initial unethical act. The act must also coincide with an objective that as a whole is good, or in other words the end must be good to support the means. If these parameters are met then acts first considered unethical become ethical and justified in war. (Muhammad, 2010) This is supported by de Beauvoir in the passage, “Here we are faced with the difficult problem of means and ends in action. We know that “the supreme end at which man must aim is his freedom, but is there no limit to the means that can be chosen to achieve it? The means can be understood only in the light of the desired end but inversely, the end is inseparable from the mean by which it is carried out, and it is a fallacy to believe that the end can be achieved by just any means. It is not possible to act for man without treating certain men, at certain times, as means” (Melchert, 2002) This theory of utilitarianism parallels ethical absolutism and is opposed by ethical relativism. Absolute ethics believe in one absolute right and wrong, where relative ethics believe there is no absolute right or wrong. The use of utilitarianism in war to justify an unethical act due to it’s’ necessity in achieving the goal, or the end, that is the greatest good for the greatest number is to believe in one absolute good. In this theory the absolute good would be the “goal” or the end, thus justifying the act or the means. (Velasquez,
Continue Reading
View Writing Issues

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Justifiable: The Case Of George And Lennie
    • 694 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Justifiable: The Case Of George And Lennie

    In the case of military ethics, a person should have the choice to kill in order to defend their country. People should look to see this is justifiable, “Consider the situation…

    • 694 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    Soc 120 Final Paper
    • 1654 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Soc 120 Final Paper

    In a military environment following orders is essentially the top priority. Insubordination is generally defined as a willful or intentional failure to obey a lawful and reasonable request of a supervisor.1 Following orders shows that the organization is well structured and disciplined. Sometimes though an order comes down from above that you may feel is not ethical or it goes against your standard thought of what is right or wrong. Here I plan to discuss my thoughts on this topic as well as supporting my claim that through the use of utilitarianism, a solution to this issue could be reached.…

    • 1654 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Eth 316 Week One Essay
    • 537 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Eth 316 Week One Essay

    The utilitarianism theory of ethics focuses on weighing options for actions and the choice made depends on the course of action that has the best consequences for the individual. This approach gives little consideration to the morals as long as the outcome benefits one’s self, even at the expense of some individuals. Morality issues receive consideration if the action taken is a moral one. For example, a person may not personally believe in war, but a soldier will serve when called because he or she believes in serving his or her country (Encyclopedia Britannica, 2011).…

    • 537 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Just And Unjust War Analysis
    • 984 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Just And Unjust War Analysis

    A review of chapter 2, 'The Crime of War' in Michael Walzer's book, "Just and Unjust Wars: A moral argument with historical illustrations." Allen Lane 1997.…

    • 984 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Strengths and Weaknesses of Utilitarianism
    • 290 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Strengths and Weaknesses of Utilitarianism

    Louis P. Pojman, “Strengths and Weaknesses of Utilitarianism” in Steven M.Cahn “Exploring Ethics –An Introductory Anthology” (Oxford University Press, 2011 , ISBN:978-0-19-975751-0) pp. 105-113…

    • 290 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Just And Unjust Wars Analysis
    • 1191 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Just And Unjust Wars Analysis

    Compared to the early 20th century, the wars of today are vastly different. The reasons for fighting, the styles of fighting, and who is fighting are all very different. However, in an age that is far removed from the past, a few things regarding war have remained the unchanged. One of the ideas that has remained unchanged in a time that is every changing, are the rules of war, as described by Michael Walzer in his book, Just and Unjust Wars. Naturally, in a time where so much has changed, there are starting to be a few objections to Walzer’s claims on the rules of war. Even though the wars of today are far different from those of the past, the moral equality of soldiers remains the same regardless if they are associated with being on an unjust…

    • 1191 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    The Just War Theory
    • 1946 Words
    • 8 Pages

    The Just War Theory

    What justifies war? Who justifies it? Why as human beings do we feel the need to fight, harm, and kill others to achieve certain goals? These questions have been pertinent to our society since the beginning of time and continue to challenge us to better understand the human psyche, and code of ethics that give Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Coast Guardsmen, and Marines credence to kill in the name of the United States of America. These ethics of war lay the foundation for that code of understanding and righteousness for when it is justifiable to pull the trigger and take the life of another, or commit an act of war.…

    • 1946 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    Morality: Conferring To C. S. Lewis
    • 1697 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Morality: Conferring To C. S. Lewis

    Ethics is the science of morals which is a branch of philosophy that is concerned with…

    • 1697 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    The Things They Carried Morality Analysis
    • 1035 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The Things They Carried Morality Analysis

    However, as noted before, this reconciliation is difficult due to the soldier’s obligation to everyday violence war requires. In response, Jeff McMahan, a professor of moral philosophy of the University of Oxford, stated this, “soldiers do no wrong even if their cause is unjust” (Ryan, 11). Practically, soldiers are given an ethical pardon because of the moral equality between soldiers. On the basis of moral equality of combatants (MEC), opposing soldiers would also be justified to kill even if they have no genuine cause (Finkelstein, 184). This means that soldiers of the aggressor country are not responsible for their killings, while soldiers of the defending country have no special protection from being killed. Comparatively, the actions and cause of a soldier are independent of one another; thus, the two should not be used interchangeably. It has also been pointed out that this may encourage more unjust wars due to a lack of consequences for the soldiers and lack of influence by the citizens (McMahan, 693). By contrast, if citizens came to believe that participation in an unjust war was wrong, soldiers would be more hesitant in fighting those wars, and governments more reluctant to initiate those wars for fear of the resistance it may bring. Therefore, it is reasonable to allow the soldiers this moral leeway with the consent of the citizens. Nevertheless,…

    • 1035 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Just War Proponents Vs Pacifists
    • 1379 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Just War Proponents Vs Pacifists

    “War, what is it good for”? The lyrics to the 60’s pop song, provokes the question that Just War proponents and Pacifists have wrestled with throughout history, reaching opposite conclusions. Those in favor of Just War theory, say war is only good insofar as it is fought for the right reasons and brings about the right end. Whereas, Pacifists reject war completely, preferring peaceful means to resolve conflict. But which one is morally and ethically right? Which one should be adopted and practiced by the Nations of this World? Upon examining the logic and philosophical implications of each ethical stance, one is able to sympathize with them both, seeing their values and virtue.…

    • 1379 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    Just War Pacifism
    • 2476 Words
    • 10 Pages

    Just War Pacifism

    Human beings have been fighting with each other since prehistoric times, and people have been discussing the rights and wrongs of it. The Ethics of War begins by assuming that war is a bad thing, and should be avoided if possible, but there can be situations when war may be catastrophic. War is a bad thing because it involves deliberately killing or injuring people, and this is a fundamental wrong. The purpose of war ethics is to help decide what is right or wrong, both for individuals and countries, and to contribute to debates on public policy, and ultimately to government and individual action.…

    • 2476 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Just And Unjust War Analysis
    • 1585 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Just And Unjust War Analysis

    A large sector of just war theory references several moral and legal implications that must be evaluated prior to engaging in attack. The legalist paradigm, as expressed by theorist and author Michael Walzer in his book Just and Unjust Wars1, evaluates the conditions that constitute just war, and elaborates on several of the key circumstances that are required to impose just war on others. Despite its strengths, this paradigm is often evaluated as being a “strawman”, and provides only a foundation for which several other nuanced views can expand on. One fundamental idea expressed in his claims though, is the idea that “nothing but aggression can justify war”1. Through this, Walzer establishes the only moral precedent for which a counter-attack…

    • 1585 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Ethics War
    • 298 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Ethics War

    According to the just war theory there are two principles which must be followed when a country considers entering a war. The first is the jus ad bellum which defines rules and obligations to be satisfied just before going to war. The first condition states that a country enters a war only if there is a just cause. Mainly, the just causes are protecting innocent life, preserving necessary decent conditions to the humans and also to secure basic human rights. It is justified to defend another nation that is itself the victim of aggression. A war must only be declared by a competent authority entrusted with the common…

    • 298 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Frankenstein: The Modern Day Prometheus
    • 499 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Frankenstein: The Modern Day Prometheus

    Human beings have been at battle with one another since prehistoric times, and people have been discussing the rights and wrongs of it for almost just as long. The purpose of war ethics is to help decide what is right or wrong, both for individuals and countries, and to contribute to debates on public policy, and ultimately to government and individual action. War ethics also lead to the creation of formal codes of war, the drafting and implementation of rules of engagement for soldiers, and in the punishment of soldiers and others for war crimes. War ethics are a highly controversial topic and many people’s opinions differ on the subject. For instance, there are individuals who believe that war is bad because it involves deliberately killing or injuring people. These people also believe that war is a fundamental wrong and an abuse of the victims’ human rights. People opposing the war may even extend further with the idea or theory of pacifism. There are several different forms of pacifism, but they all include the idea that war and violence are unjustifiable, and that conflicts should be settled in a peaceful manner. Many people believe that pacifism is more than opposition to war. They argue that it must include action to promote justice and human rights. This is where those who believe that war isn’t particularly good nor bad but believe it may be necessary and do not see it as wrong come into the picture. The people for war believe that war should be fought if there is a just cause, has been lawfully declared, the intention behind the war is good or pure, other plans of resolving issues had been tried first, there is a reasonable chance of success, and the means must be in proportion to the end that the war seeks to achieve. Many individuals for war argue that it is important to acknowledge the difference between the moralities of pacifism as it applies to an individual, and the application…

    • 499 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Utilitarian Ethics
    • 760 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Utilitarian Ethics

    Utilitarianism: Utilitarianism is an ethical system that is most often attributed to philosophers such as John Stuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham. Utilitarianism believes that the most ethical thing to do is to maximize the happiness within a society. Utilitarian’s believe that actions have calculable outcomes and that ethical choices have outcomes which lead to the most happiness to the most members of a society. Utilitarianism is often considered a consequentialist philosophical outlook because it both believes that outcomes can be predicted and because it judges actions based on their outcomes. Thus, utilitarianism is often associated with the phrase 'the ends justify the means.'…

    • 760 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More

Related Topics