Search results for 'Just war' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Order:
  1. Augustine Defines Just War (2006). " In Vain Have I Smitten Your Children". In R. Joseph Hoffmann (ed.), The Just War and Jihad. Prometheus Press
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2. Jewish Holy War (2006). Who Broke Their Vow First? In R. Joseph Hoffmann (ed.), The Just War and Jihad. Prometheus Press
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3.  56
    N. Fotion (2007). War and Ethics: A New Just War Theory. Continuum.
    Introduction -- Just war theory -- Objections to just war theory -- Easy cases : Germany, Japan, Korea -- Harder cases : Serbia, Russia, Kosovo, Iraq -- Multiple reasons -- More problems with just war theory -- Prevention : Sri Lanka, Thailand -- Two just war theories -- Problems with just war theory I -- Problems for just war theory II -- Closing thoughts.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   14 citations  
  4. Thomas W. Simpson & Vincent C. Müller (forthcoming). Just War and Robots’ Killings. Philosophical Quarterly:pqv075.
    May lethal autonomous weapons systems—‘killer robots ’—be used in war? The majority of writers argue against their use, and those who have argued in favour have done so on a consequentialist basis. We defend the moral permissibility of killer robots, but on the basis of the non-aggregative structure of right assumed by Just War theory. This is necessary because the most important argument against killer robots, the responsibility trilemma proposed by Rob Sparrow, makes the same assumptions. We show that (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5. Paul Richard Daniels (2015). Just War and Non-Combatants in the Private Military Industry. Journal of Military Ethics 14 (2):146-161.
    I argue that, according to Just War Theory, those who work as administrative personnel in the private military industry can be permissibly harmed while at work by enemy combatants. That is, for better or worse, a Just War theorist should consider all those who work as administrative personnel in the private military industry either: (i) individuals who may be permissibly restrained with lethal force while at work, or (ii) individuals who may be harmed by permissible attacks against their (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6. Aleksandar Jokic (2012). What's A Just War Theorist? Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Criminology 4 (2):91-114.
    The article provides an account of the unlikely revival of the medieval Just War Theory, due in large part to the efforts of Michael Walzer. Its purpose is to address the question: What is a just war theorist? By exploring contrasts between scholarly activity and forms of international activism, the paper argues that just war theorists appear to be just war criminals, both on the count of aiding and abetting aggression and on the count of inciting (...)
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  7.  39
    Leonard Kahn (2013). Just War Theory and Cyber-Attacks. In Fritz Alhoff, Nicholas Evans & Adam Henschke (eds.), Not Just Wars. Routledge
    In this chapter, I take up the question of whether one of the central principles of jus ad bellum – just cause – is relevant in a world in which cyberattacks occur. I argue that this principle is just as relevant as ever, though it needs modification in light of recent developments. In particular, I argue, contrary to many traditional just war theorists, that just cause should not be limited to physical attacks. In the process, I (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8.  40
    Jonathan Parry (2015). Just War Theory, Legitimate Authority, and Irregular Belligerency. Philosophia 43 (1):175-196.
    Since its earliest incarnations, just war theory has included the requirement that war must be initiated and waged by a legitimate authority. However, while recent years have witnessed a remarkable resurgence in interest in just war theory, the authority criterion is largely absent from contemporary discussions. In this paper I aim to show that this is an oversight worth rectifying, by arguing that the authority criterion plays a much more important role within just war theorising than is (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  9.  18
    David K. Chan (2012). Beyond Just War: A Virtue Ethics Approach. Palgrave Macmillan.
    Are today’s wars different from earlier wars? Or do we need a different ethics for old and new wars alike? Unlike most books on the morality of war, this book rejects the ‘just war’ tradition, proposing a virtue ethics of war to take its place. Like torture, war cannot be justified. This book asks and answers the question: “If war is a very great evil, would a leader with courage, justice, compassion, and all the other moral virtues ever choose (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  10. Igor Primoratz (2002). Michael Walzer's Just War Theory: Some Issues of Responsibility. [REVIEW] Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 5 (2):221-243.
    In his widely influential statement of just war theory, Michael Walzer exempts conscripted soldiers from all responsibility for taking part in war, whether just or unjust (the thesis of the moral equality of soldiers). He endows the overwhelming majority of civilians with almost absolute immunity from military attack on the ground that they aren't responsible for the war their country is waging, whether just or unjust. I argue that Walzer is much too lenient on both soldiers and (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  11.  26
    James Turner Johnson (2008). The Idea of Defense in Historical and Contemporary Thinking About Just War. Journal of Religious Ethics 36 (4):543-556.
    What is, or should be, the role of defense in thinking about the justification of use of armed force? Contemporary just war thinking prioritizes defense as the principal, and perhaps the only, just cause for resorting to armed force. By contrast, classic just war tradition, while recognizing defense as justification for use of force by private persons, did not reason from self-defense to the justification of the use of force on behalf of the political community, but instead (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  12.  46
    Graham Parsons (2012). The Incoherence of Walzer's Just War Theory. Social Theory and Practice 38 (4):663-88.
    In his Just and Unjust Wars, Michael Walzer claims that his theory of just war is based on the rights of individuals to life and liberty. This is not the case. Walzer in fact bases his theory of jus ad bellum on the supreme rights of supra-individual political communities. According to his theory of jus ad bellum, the rights of political communities are of utmost importance, and individuals can be sacrificed for the sake of these communal rights. At (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  13.  1
    Rosemary B. Kellison (2015). Impure Agency and the Just War. Journal of Religious Ethics 43 (2):317-341.
    Feminist critiques of intention challenge some aspects of traditional just war reasoning, including the criteria of right intention and discrimination. I take note of these challenges and propose some directions just war reasoners might take in response. First, right intention can be evaluated more accurately by judging what actors in war actually do than by attempting to uncover inward dispositions. Assessing whether agents in war have taken due care to minimize foreseeable collateral damage, avoided intentional targeting of noncombatants, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  14.  51
    Cheyney Ryan (2013). Pacifism, Just War, and Self-Defense. Philosophia 41 (4):1-29.
    This essay distinguishes two main forms of pacifism, personal pacifism and political pacifism. It then contrasts the views on self-defense of political pacifism and just war theory, paying special attention to notions of the state and sovereignty.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  15.  9
    Ping-Cheung Lo (2012). The Art of War Corpus and Chinese Just War Ethics Past and Present. Journal of Religious Ethics 40 (3):404-446.
    The idea of “just war” is not alien to Chinese thought. The term “yi zhan” (usually translated as “just war” or “righteous war” in English) is used in Mencius, was renewed by Mao Zedong, and is still being used in China today (zhengyi zhanzheng). The best place to start exploring this Chinese idea is in the enormous Art of War corpus in premodern China, of which the Seven Military Classics is the best representative. This set of treatises served (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  16.  60
    Nick Fotion (2006). Two Theories of Just War. Philosophia 34 (1):53-64.
    As it is traditionally conceived, Just War Theory is not well suited for dealing with nation vs non-nation wars. It thus makes sense to create a second Just War Theory to deal with these wars. This article explores the differences and similarities between the two theories.
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  17.  14
    Nathan Stout (2016). Assembling an Army: Considerations for Just War Theory. Journal of Global Ethics 12 (2):204-221.
    ABSTRACTThe aim of this paper is to draw attention to an issue which has been largely overlooked in contemporary just war theory – namely the impact that the conditions under which an army is assembled are liable to have on the judgments that are made with respect to traditional principles of jus ad bellum and jus in bello. I argue that the way in which an army is assembled can significantly alter judgments regarding the justice of a war. In (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  18.  15
    Andrew Sola (2009). The Enlightened Grunt? Invincible Ignorance in the Just War Tradition. Journal of Military Ethics 8 (1):48-65.
    This essay addresses one of the central questions in the ongoing debate about just war theory: are soldiers morally responsible for serving in unjust wars? Francisco de Vitoria addressed this question in the sixteenth century using the concepts of invincible and vincible ignorance. He excused soldiers serving in unjust wars, if they did not know the war was unjust and if they did not have the means to overcome their ignorance; if they had the means, they were morally culpable. (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  19.  45
    Joseph M. Schwartz (2004). Misreading Islamist Terrorism: The "War Against Terrorism" and Just-War Theory. Metaphilosophy 35 (3):273-302.
    : The Bush administration's military war on terrorism is a blunt, ineffective, and unjust response to the threat posed to innocent civilians by terrorism. Decentralized terrorist networks can only be effectively fought by international cooperation among police and intelligence agencies representing diverse nation‐states, including ones with predominantly Islamic populations. The Bush administration's allegations of a global Islamist terrorist threat to the national interests of the United States misread the decentralized and complex nature of Islamist politics. Undoubtedly there exists a “combat (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  20.  83
    Aaron Fichtelberg (2006). Applying the Rules of Just War Theory to Engineers in the Arms Industry. Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (4):685-700.
    Given the close relationship between the modern arms industry and the military, engineers and other professionals who work in the arms industry should be held accountable to the principles of just war theory. While they do not deploy weapons on the battlefield and are not in the military chain of command, technical professionals nonetheless have a moral duty to abide by principles of jus ad bellum and jus in bello. They are morally responsible both for choosing the companies that (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  21.  50
    Gregory M. Reichberg (2010). Thomas Aquinas Between Just War and Pacifism. Journal of Religious Ethics 38 (2):219-241.
    Some recent authors have argued that Aquinas deliberately integrated a pacifist outlook into his just war theory. Others, by contrast, have maintained that his rejection of pacifism was unequivocal. The present article attempts to set the historical record straight by an examination of Aquinas's writings on this topic. In addition to Q. 40, A. 1 of Summa theologiae II–II, the text usually cited in this connection, this article considers the biblical commentaries where Aquinas explains how the Gospel “precepts of (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  22.  5
    S. Brandt Ford (2013). Jus Ad Vim and the Just Use of Lethal Force Short of War. In Fritz Allhoff, Nicholas Evans & Adam Henschke (eds.), Routledge Handbook of Ethics and War: Just War Theory in the 21st Century. Routledge 63--75.
    In this chapter, I argue that the notion which Michael Walzer calls jus ad vim might improve the moral evaluation for using military lethal force in conflicts other than war, particularly those situations of conflict short-of-war. First, I describe his suggested approach to morally justifying the use of lethal force outside the context of war. I argue that Walzer’s jus ad vim is a broad concept that encapsulates a state’s mechanisms for exercising power short-of-war. I focus on his more narrow (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23.  17
    Ineke Malsch (2013). The Just War Theory and the Ethical Governance of Research. Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (2):461-486.
    This article analyses current trends in and future expectations of nanotechnology and other key enabling technologies for security as well as dual use nanotechnology from the perspective of the ethical Just War Theory (JWT), interpreted as an instrument to increase the threshold for using armed force for solving conflicts. The aim is to investigate the relevance of the JWT to the ethical governance of research. The analysis gives rise to the following results. From the perspective of the JWT, military (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  24.  58
    Henrik Syse (2010). The Platonic Roots of Just War Doctrine: A Reading of Plato’s Republic. Diametros 23:104-123.
    Plato arguably stands as one of the precursors to what we today know as the Just War Tradition, and he has more to say about ethics and the use of force than what is often acknowledged. In this article I try to show, by analyzing selected passages and perspectives from the Republic, that Plato regards the role of military ethics as crucial in the construction of the ideal city, and he sees limitation of brutality and more generally a philosophical (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  25.  98
    John Forge (2009). Proportionality, Just War Theory and Weapons Innovation. Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (1):25-38.
    Just wars are supposed to be proportional responses to aggression: the costs of war must not greatly exceed the benefits. This proportionality principle raises a corresponding ‘interpretation problem’: what are the costs and benefits of war, how are they to be determined, and a ‘measurement problem’: how are costs and benefits to be balanced? And it raises a problem about scope: how far into the future do the states of affairs to be measured stretch? It is argued here that (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  26.  16
    Peter L. P. Simpson (2011). Transcending Justice: Pope John Paul II and Just War. Journal of Religious Ethics 39 (2):286-298.
    Pope John Paul II's opposition to the Iraq War was not that it failed to meet the conditions of Just War Theory. Indeed, we cannot tell from what he publicly said whether he thought it met those conditions or not, for he would have opposed it in any case. His thinking was rather that even just and necessary wars always come, as it were, too late, and are never able to solve the problems that made wars just (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  27.  87
    James Pattison (2013). When Is It Right to Fight? Just War Theory and the Individual-Centric Approach. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16 (1):35-54.
    Recent work in the ethics of war has done much to challenge the collectivism of the convention-based, Walzerian just war theory. In doing so, it raises the question of when it is permissible for soldiers to resort to force. This article considers this issue and, in doing so, argues that the rejection of collectivism in just war should go further still. More specifically, it defends the ‘Individual-Centric Approach’ to the deep morality of war, which asserts that the justifiability (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  28. Laurie Calhoun (2001). The Metaethical Paradox of Just War Theory. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 4 (1):41-58.
    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 (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29.  31
    Jovan Babic (2007). Non-Culpable Ignorance and Just War Theory. Filozofija I Društvo 18 (3):59-68.
    The so called ′non-culpable ignorance′ is an instrument to justify participating in a war on a defeated side, on condition that fighters sincerely believe that they are defending a just cause and had some valid reasons to believe in having a chance to win. Within the just war theory this instrument is needed to make both sides prima facie right, otherwise the theory would imply that those who lose are guilty in advance, especially if they are the weaker (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30.  59
    Darrell Cole (2012). Torture and Just War. Journal of Religious Ethics 40 (1):26-51.
    I offer an argument for why torture, as an act of state-sponsored force to gain information crucial to the well-being of the common good, should be considered as a tactic of war, and therefore scrutinized in terms of just war theory. I argue that, for those committed to the justifiability of the use of force, most of the popular arguments against all acts of torture are unpersuasive because the logic behind them would forbid equally any act of mutilating or (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31. Jean Bethke Elshtain (ed.) (1992). Just War Theory. New York University Press.
    Available Again! Long before the "shock and awe" campaign against Iraq in March 2003, debates swarmed around the justifications of the U.S.-led war to depose Saddam Hussein. While George W. Bush's administration declared a just war of necessity, opponents charged that it was a war of choice, and even opportunism. Behind the rhetoric lie vital questions: when is war just, and what means are acceptable even in the course of a just war? Originally published in 1991, in (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  32.  54
    Helmut David Baer & Joseph E. Capizzi (2005). Just War Theories Reconsidered: Problems with Prima Facie Duties and the Need for a Political Ethic. Journal of Religious Ethics 33 (1):119-137.
    This essay challenges a "meta-theory" in just war analysis that purports to bridge the divide between just war and pacifism. According to the meta-theory, just war and pacifism share a common presumption against killing that can be overridden only under conditions stipulated by the just war criteria. Proponents of this meta-theory purport that their interpretation leads to ecumenical consensus between "just warriors" and pacifists, and makes the just war theory more effective in reducing recourse (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  33.  62
    John W. Lango (2010). Nonlethal Weapons, Noncombatant Immunity, and Combatant Nonimmunity: A Study of Just War Theory. [REVIEW] Philosophia 38 (3):475-497.
    Frequently, the just war principle of noncombatant immunity is interpreted as morally prohibiting the intentional targeting of noncombatants. Apparently, many just war theorists assume that to target means to (intend to) kill. Now that effective nonlethal weapons have been envisaged, it should be evident that there is no conceptual connection between intentionally targeting and intentionally killing. For, using nonlethal weapons, there could be intentional targeting without intentional killing. This paper explores the question of whether the noncombatant immunity principle (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34.  17
    Shawn Kaplan (2013). Just War Theory: What Is It Good For? Philosophy in the Contemporary World 19 (2):4-14.
    The usefulness of Just War Theory (JWT) has been called into question in recent years for two key reasons. First, military conflicts today less frequently fit the model traditionally assumed by JWT of interstate wars between regular armies. Second, there is a perception that JWT has lost its critical edge after its categories and principles have been co-opted by bellicose political leaders. This paper critically examines two responses to these concerns which shift the locus of responsibility for wars towards (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35.  23
    David K. Chan (2012). Just War, Noncombatant Immunity, and the Concept of Supreme Emergency. Journal of Military Ethics 11 (4):273-286.
    The supreme emergency exemption proposed by Michael Walzer has engendered controversy because it permits violations of the jus in bello principle of discrimination when a state is faced with imminent defeat at the hands of a very evil enemy. Traditionalists among just war theorists believe that noncombatants should never be deliberately targeted in war whether or not there is a supreme emergency. Pacifists on the other hand reject war as immoral even in a supreme emergency. Unlike Walzer, neither (...) war traditionalists nor pacifists make a special case for supreme emergencies. In this paper, I borrow Walzer’s concept to provide support for a different ethics of war that limits war to supreme emergencies. In non-supreme emergency situations, I agree with pacifists in rejecting war even if just war requirements are satisfied. But in supreme emergencies, I agree with just war traditionalists that war can be legitimately fought provided that moral constraints that protect noncombatants are respected. (shrink)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  36.  1
    Charles Brown (2010). Defending the Indefensible: A Dialogical and Feminist Critique of Just War Theory. Skepsis: A Journal for Philosophy and Interdisciplinary Research 21 (1):85-106.
    Even though just war theory is ostensibly intended to rule out some wars and some forms of warfare, Charles Brown argues that, because of its basis in value-hierarachical dualism, just war theory ultimately props up warfare by justifying it. By its nature, just war theory defines warfare as waged against an evildoer, thereby shutting down avenues for dialog and peaceful prevention of warfare: "Just war theory has always been developed with the noblest of motives only to (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  37.  13
    Justinas Žilinskas (2012). Just War” Doctrine and its Reflections in Our Times. Jurisprudence 19 (3):1201-1214.
    The present article discusses a well-known religious philosophical and partially legal doctrine of the “Just war”, developed in the Christian tradition by St. Augustine, St. Tomas Aquinas, Francisco de Vittoria, Francisco Suarez, Hugo Grotius and many other thinkers. The main thesis of the doctrine is that war will be just only if it corresponds to certain criteria, such as autoritas principi (waged by the sovereign), justa causa (on just aim) and with recta intentio (animus) or the aim (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  38.  16
    Shawn Kaplan (2012). Just War Theory: What Is It Good For? Philosophy in the Contemporary World 19 (2):4-14.
    The usefulness of Just War Theory (JWT) has been called into question in recent years for two key reasons. First, military conflicts today less frequently fit the model traditionally assumed by JWT of interstate wars between regular armies. Second, there is a perception that JWT has lost its critical edge after its categories and principles have been co-opted by bellicose political leaders. This paper critically examines two responses to these concerns which shift the locus of responsibility for wars towards (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  39.  11
    Vicente Medina (2013). The Innocent in the Just War Thinking of Vitoria and Suárez: A Challenge Even for Secular Just War Theorists and International Law. Ratio Juris 26 (1):47-64.
    Vitoria and Suárez defend the categorical immunity of the innocent not to be intentionally killed. But they allow for inflicting collective punishment on the innocent and the noninnocent alike during and after a just war. So they allow for deliberately harming them. Inflicting harm on the innocent can often result in their death. Hence, holding both claims seems incoherent. First, the objections against using the term “innocent” are explained. Second, their views on just war are explored. And third, (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  40.  4
    Edward T. Barrett (2015). Reliable Old Wineskins: The Applicability of the Just War Tradition to Military Cyber Operations. Philosophy and Technology 28 (3):387-405.
    This article argues that the traditional jus ad bellum and jus in bello criteria are fully capable of providing the ethical guidance needed to legitimately conduct military cyber operations. The first part examines the criteria’s foundations by focusing on the notion of liability to defensive harm worked out by revisionist just war thinkers. The second part critiques the necessity of alternative frameworks, which its proponents assert are required to at least supplement the traditional just war criteria. Using the (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  41.  3
    Kristopher Norris (2015). Deliberating Just War. Journal of Religious Ethics 43 (1):178-184.
    This essay responds to James Turner Johnson's critiques of my argument in “‘Never Again War’: Recent Shifts in the Roman Catholic Just War Tradition and the Question of ‘Functional Pacifism.’” . It attends specifically to three of Johnson's objections and offers accounts of the meaning and use of the term “functional pacifism,” an understanding of classic just war thought as a tradition, and the concepts of peace and authority within just war and pacifist thought. It argues that (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  42. John W. Lango (2005). Preventive Wars, Just War Principles, and the United Nations. Journal of Ethics 9 (1-2):247-268.
    This paper explores the question of whether the United Nations should engage in preventive military actions. Correlatively, it asks whether UN preventive military actions could satisfy just war principles. Rather than from the standpoint of the individual nation state, the ethics of preventive war is discussed from the standpoint of the UN. For the sake of brevity, only the legitimate authority, just cause, last resort, and proportionality principles are considered. Since there has been disagreement about the specific content (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  43. Christopher Toner (2010). The Logical Structure of Just War Theory. Journal of Ethics 14 (2):81-102.
    A survey of just war theory literature reveals the existence of quite different lists of principles. This apparent arbitrariness raises a number of questions: What is the relation between ad bellum and in bello principles? Why are there so many of the former and so few of the latter? What order is there among the various principles? To answer these questions, I first draw on some recent work by Jeff McMahan to show that ad bellum and in bello principles (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  44.  3
    Thom Brooks (ed.) (2012). Just War Theory. Brill.
    Just War Theory raises some of the most pressing and important philosophical issues of our day. This book brings together some of the most important essays in this area written by leading scholars and offering significant contributions to how we understand just war theory.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  45. Philip Smith (2006). The Just War and Integrational Pacifism. In Barbara Bleisch & Jean-Daniel Strub (eds.), Pazifismus: Ideengeschichte, Theorie Und Praxis. Haupt 163.
    This article suggests that just war theory can benefit from ideas found in "integrational pacifism," a position that rejects war while endorsing the "violence of the magistrate." This position is often held by Quakers.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  46.  20
    Juha Räikkä (2014). Redistributive Wars and Just War Principles. Ratio.Ru 12:4-26.
    The topic of the paper is the justness of the so-called global redistributive wars — wars whose prime purpose would be the correction of global economic and power structures that are said to cause suffering in poor countries. My aim is to comment on Kasper Lippert-Rasmussen’s argument concerning the implications of Thomas Pogge’s theory of global poverty. Pogge has argued that affluent coun-tries uphold global institutional structures that have a significant causal role in leading to the poverty-related deaths of millions (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  47.  35
    John J. Davenport (2011). Just War Theory, Humanitarian Intervention, and the Need for a Democratic Federation. Journal of Religious Ethics 39 (3):493-555.
    The primary purpose of government is to secure public goods that cannot be achieved by free markets. The Coordination Principle tells us to consolidate sovereign power in a single institution to overcome collective action problems that otherwise prevent secure provision of the relevant public goods. There are several public goods that require such coordination at the global level, chief among them being basic human rights. The claim that human rights require global coordination is supported in three main steps. First, I (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  48. Richard J. Regan (2013). Just War: Principles and Cases. Catholic University of America Press.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  49.  24
    David R. Haws (2006). Engineering the Just War: Examination of an Approach to Teaching Engineering Ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (2):365-372.
    The efficiency of engineering applied to civilian projects sometimes threatens to run away with the social agenda, but in military applications, engineering often adds a devastating sleekness to the inevitable destruction of life. The relative crudeness of terrorism (e.g., 9/11) leaves a stark after-image, which belies the comparative insignificance of random (as opposed to orchestrated) belligerence. Just as engineering dwarfs the bricolage of vernacular design—moving us past the appreciation of brush-strokes, so to speak—the scale of engineered destruction makes it (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  50.  9
    Matthijs De Blois (2011). Blessed [Are] the Peacemakers... Grotius on the Just War and Christian Pacifism. Grotiana 32 (1):20-39.
    In The Law of War and Peace Grotius needs many more pages for the theological arguments in the debate on war and peace than for the arguments derived from natural law and international law. Apparently the controversy within Christendom on the justifiability of warfare was one of the most important issues to be addressed in his magnum opus. The general discussion in his days was about the proper interpretation of the Holy Scriptures, the authority of which was accepted by all (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
1 — 50 / 1000