Abstract
The traditional requirements upon the waging of a “just war” are ostensibly independent, but in actual practice each tenet is subject ultimately to the interpretation of a “legitimate authority”, whose declaration becomes the necessary and sufficient condition. While just war theory presupposes that some acts are absolutely wrong, it also implies that the killing of innocents can be rendered permissible through human decree. Nations are conventionally delimited, and leaders are conventionally appointed. Any group of people could band together to form a nation, and any person could, in principle, be appointed the leader of any nation. Because the “just war” approach assumes absolutism while implying relativism, the stance is paradoxical and hence rationally untenable.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Botwinick, Rita Steinhardt (ed.), A Holocaust Reader: From Ideology to Annihilation. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1998.
Cady, Duane L., From Warism to Pacifism: A Moral Continuum. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1989.
Cady, Duane L. and Richard Werner (eds.), Just War, Nonviolence and Nuclear Deterrence. Wakefield, NH: Longwood Academic, 1991.
Calhoun, Laurie, Critical Reasoning Regarding War, The Acorn X(1), 1999, pp. 5–26.
Calhoun, Laurie, The Injustice of ‘Just Wars’, Peace Review 12(3), 2000a, pp. 449–455.
Calhoun, Laurie, Just War? Moral Soldiers? The Independent Review, Volume 4(3), 2000b, pp. 325–345.
Calhoun, Laurie, Problems of Explanation for Metaethical Relativists, Diálogos XXXIII(71), 1998, pp. 121–130.
Calhoun, Laurie, Relativism, Egoism and Reality, Diálogos XXXVI(77), 2001a.
Calhoun, Laurie, Violence and Hypocrisy, Dissent Winter, 2001b.
Christopher, Paul, The Ethics of War and Peace: An Introduction to Legal and Moral Issues, 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1999.
Cooper, David (ed.), The Manson Murders: A Philosophical Inquiry. Cambridge, MA: Schenkman Publishing Co., 1974.
Decosse, David E. (ed.), But Was It Just? New York: Doubleday, 1992.
Harman, Gilbert, Explaining Value. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Harman, Gilbert, The Nature of Morality. New York: Oxford University Press, 1977.
Harman, Gilbert, Reasoning, Meaning and Mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Harman, Gilbert and Judith Jarvis Thomson, Moral Relativism and Moral Objectivity. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1996.
Holmes, Robert L., On War and Morality. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1989.
Kant, Immanuel, Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals, trans. H. J. Paton. New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1964.
O'Brien, William, Just War Theory, in G. Percesepe (ed.), Ethics: Personal and Social Responsibility in a Diverse World, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1995, pp. 253–264.
Phillips, Robert L., War and Justice. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 1984.
Regan, Richard J., Just War: Principles and Cases. Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1996.
Sifray, Micah L., and Christopher Cerf (eds.), The Gulf War Reader. New York: Random House, 1991.
Walzer, Michael, Just and Unjust Wars. New York: Basic Books, 1977.
Wasserstrom, Richard (ed.), War and Morality. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1970.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Calhoun, L. The Metaethical Paradox of Just War Theory. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 4, 41–58 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011440213213
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011440213213