PHIL 104 (STOLZE) Notes on Heather Widdows, Global Ethics: An Introduction, chapter 8.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Presenter By: Mey Somnang ID: I30030 Date:
Advertisements

Michael Lacewing Can war be just? Michael Lacewing © Michael Lacewing.
Just War: Along side Pacifism and Realism, Just War theory represents one of the three main moral responses to the issue of war. Just War theory has developed.
Just War Theory.
Just War Theory.
Justice in Action: Just War Theory
PHIL 104 (STOLZE) Notes on Heather Widdows, Global Ethics: An Introduction, chapter 1.
War and Violence. Violence as a Process Definitive of the “State” Distinction between “jus ad bellum” – justice of war and “jus in bello” – justice in.
International Law and Armed Conflict MA Course Lecture: Conduct of Contemporary Warfare.
The Ethics of War Spring Main normative questions When, if ever, is resort to war justified? What can we permissibly do in war? Who are responsible.
Humanitarian Intervention in World Politics I35034 zhangzhao.
WALZER CHAPTER 4: “LAW AND ORDER IN INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY” What, if anything, morally justifies war? What is the relation between international law and.
“War Theories” Training Session 2 May 2014
Topics in Moral and Political Philosophy War. Justice in war Jus in bello principles: concern the justice of conduct within war (which types of weapons.
1 I I Is Pre-Emptive War Wrong?. 2 Phillips’ Central Claim On the principle that just war requires both justice in going to war (jus ad bellum) and justice.
PacifismJust WarCrusade. Matthew 5:21-22… “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, 'Do not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject.
BY CHARLES ARMITAGE, LIAM HOLOHAN AND RUAN TELFER WAR AND PEACE: KANTIAN ETHICS.
PHIL 104 (STOLZE) Notes on Heather Widdows, Global Ethics: An Introduction, chapter 4.
Realism and Pacifism.
Counter Immunity of noncombatants Solidarity Human Family Terrorism Right Intention Conscientious Objector Development Institutional War Forgiveness Israel.
© Michael Lacewing Can war be just? Michael Lacewing
I S WAR ON T ERROR A J UST WAR ? Saad Khalid PLS 101.
Limits on Political Authority 1)Morality: laws obligate only if they are moral, that is, if they are consistent with reason or the natural law (Stoics).
Just War Theory Unit #7: The Cold War Essential Question: Was the Cold War a just war?
Ronald F. White, Ph.D. Professor of Philosophy College of Mount St. Joseph.
“War Theories” Training Session 7 Jan 2014
Mass Surveillance Ethical Arguments towards a Unifying Ideal Robert Heston.
Government 1740 International Law Summer 2008 Lecture 9: The Use of Force.
Military Ethics in the New Millennium
Chapter Eight: War, Terrorism and Civil Liberties Review Applying Ethics: A Text with Readings (10 th ed.) Julie C. Van Camp, Jeffrey Olen, Vincent Barry.
Use of violence is any violence against humans justified? what about violence in entertainment, sport, etc.? Wars? just war theory, more below. how can.
International Section | Leadership & Management Division | College of Management and Technology 31. Just War Theory SLP(E) Course.
1 Applied Ethics Section 6 Ethics of War. 2 Is Ethics Applicable to Warfare? Some reject the applicability of ethics to wars, citing the adage ‘All’s.
CHAPTER EIGHT: SOCIAL PHILOSOPHY P H I L O S O P H Y A Text with Readings TENTH EDITION M A N U E L V E L A S Q U E Z.
Philosophy 220 The Moral Status of War.
X_UTgc5vQY X_UTgc5vQY.
Lesson Aim To consider some examples of war To learn about the Just War Theory.
Government 1740 International Law Summer 2006 Lecture 9: The Use of Force.
Notes on Harry van der Linden, “Barack Obama, Resort to Force, and U.S. Military Hegemony” (2009)
Just War When is war the answer?.
I will know about the 3 parts of the Just War Theory – Jus ad bellum, Jus in bello, Just post bellum Hmk: Evaluate Just War Theory.
Quick Vocab Test What do these words mean? Pacifism Just war Jus ad bellum Jus in bello Jus post bellum.
Justice in Action: Just War Theory Just War Theory   Jus ad bellum: proposals to justify the use of force in a particular type of situation   Jus.
Justice in Action: Just War Theory PHI 2604 January 25, 2016.
Chapter Eight: War, Terrorism and Civil Liberties Applying Ethics: A Text with Readings (10 th ed.) Julie C. Van Camp, Jeffrey Olen, Vincent Barry Cengage.
Justice in Action: Just War Theory. Just War Theory Jus ad bellum: proposals to justify the use of force in a particular type of situation Jus in bello:
War! What is it good for?. The Just War Theory Many religious believers (Christians), argue that war can be justified in some circumstances. Just War.
Chapter 19: Violence, Terrorism and War Violence: Background and Statistics ◦ Defining violence ◦ Violence in the movies and media Terrorism: Background.
Chapter 8 War and Strife. Security Issues Global trends, see: –Human security.
International Humanitarian Law Oral Presentation Module Name: UJGT8E-15-M Student No:
Conceptual Overview. Jus ad Bellum (start) Jus in Bello (middle) Jus post Bellum (end)
International Law and the Use of Force (LG566)
PHIL 104 (STOLZE) Notes on Heather Widdows, Global Ethics: An Introduction, chapter 4.
Lecture #6 Just War Theory.
This is Why you can’t just blow stuff up.
Can Humanitarian Intervention ever be Humanitarian? The concept of R2P
List some good reasons for a country to go to war.
Just War or the Ethics of War
THE JUST WAR THEORY.
Just War Theory. Just War Theory JWT is not Pacifism Pacifism says that war is always unjust, and therefore always wrong. This is an absolute statement.
War and Violence Can war be just?.
JUST WAR.
Justice in Action: Just War Theory
JUST WAR.
Review from Class Lesson
A Text with Readings TENTH EDITION M A N U E L V E L A S Q U E Z
The Catholic Faith Handbook for Youth, Third Edition
Human Rights and Humanitarian Intervention
Just War Principles 1. Last Resort
Presentation transcript:

PHIL 104 (STOLZE) Notes on Heather Widdows, Global Ethics: An Introduction, chapter 8

Topics in Chapter Eight War Terrorism Humanitarian Intervention

Moral Perspectives on War Warism = no moral justification is needed for going to war (“War is hell!”) Pacifism = no moral justification is possible for going to war Just War Theory = there are moral principles that govern when to go to war, and how to wage it

Just War Theory Jus ad bellum = justice of going to war Jus in bello = justice of conduct during war

Principles of Jus ad bellum Legitimate authority Just cause Right intention Strong probability of success Last resort Proportionality

Principles of Jus in bello Discrimination Proportionality Military necessity

War and Personal Responsibility In his 2002 article “War without Sacrifice: The Loss of Personal Responsibility” (*) the philosopher Cheyney Ryan has proposed the following Principle of Personal Integrity: “You should only endorse those military actions of your country in which you yourself would be willing to give your life (tomorrow).” On the basis of this moral principle, which recent U.S.-led military actions would you have supported? Ryan also defines a “chickenhawk” as “someone who vigorously endorses a war and its sacrifices while diligently avoiding such sacrifices himself” (The Chickenhawk Syndrome, p. 1) *(For the article, see Ryan’s most recent book is The Chickenhawk Syndrome: War, Sacrifice, and Personal Responsibility [Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, 2009].)

Other Contemporary Forms of Conflict Terrorism Humanitarian Intervention

Morality and Terrorism Terrorism as a Just War? Jus ad bellum and terrorism Jus in bello and terrorism How to balance security and civil liberties?

The Morality of Humanitarian Intervention Respects the “inviolate” and “universal” nature of human rights Takes duties of global justice seriously Respects all human beings, not just citizens

Problems with Humanitarian Intervention The “humanitarian claim might be abused. It is difficult to justify force as a preventative measure. It is difficult to publicly justify military casualties to defend non- compatriots. There are practical problems about who decides when it is justified and on what criteria. There are practical problems about insisting that states go to war when it might not be in their interest.