Search results for 'War' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Sort by:
  1. Leonard Kahn (2013). Just War Theory and Cyber-Attacks. In Fritz Alhoff, Nicholas Evans & Adam Henschke (eds.), Not Just Wars. Routledge.score: 25.0
    In this chapter, I take up the question of whether one of the central principles of jus ad bellumjust causeis 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 offer an improved definition of cyberattack and show how some other principles of jus ad bellum constrain this widened notion of just cause. (shrink)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Thomas M. Hughes (2012). Is Political Obligation Necessary for Obedience? Hobbes on Hostility, War and Obligation. Teoria Politica 2:77-99.score: 24.0
    Contemporary debates on obedience and consent, such as those between Thomas Senor and A. John Simmons, suggest that either political obligation must exist as a concept or (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Jeff McMahan (2004). The Ethics of Killing in War. Ethics 114 (4):693-733.score: 24.0
    The traditional theory of the just war comprises two sets of principles, one governing the resort to war ( jus ad bellum) and the other governing the conduct (...) of war ( jus in bello). The two sets of principles are regarded, in Michael Walzers words, aslogically independent. It is perfectly possible for a just war to be fought unjustly and for an unjust war to be fought in strict accordance with the rules.”1 Let us say that those who fight in a just war arejust combatants,” while those who fight in a war that is unjust because it lacks a just cause areunjust combatants.” (A just cause is an aim that can contribute to the justification for war and that may permissibly be pursued by means of war.)2 The most important implication of the idea that jus in bello is independent of jus ad bellum is that.. (shrink)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Jeff McMahan (2006). The Ethics of Killing in War. Philosophia 34 (1):693-733.score: 24.0
    This paper argues that certain central tenets of the traditional theory of the just war cannot be correct. It then advances an alternative account grounded in the (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Seth Lazar (forthcoming). The Principle of Distinction Between Combatants and Noncombatants in War: A Defence (MS). Oxford University Press.score: 24.0
    The Principle of Distinction between combatants and noncombatants in war is, if not unique, then among a vanishingly small set of moral principles on which almost everybody (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Igor Primoratz (2002). Michael Walzer's Just War Theory: Some Issues of Responsibility. [REVIEW] Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 5 (2):221-243.score: 24.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Dan Demetriou (2013). Honor War Theory: Romance or Reality? Philosophical Papers 42 (3):285 - 313.score: 24.0
    Just War Theory (JWT) replaced an older "warrior code," an approach to war that remains poorly understood and dismissively treated in the philosophical literature. This paper (...) builds on recent work on honor to address these deficiencies. By providing a clear, systematic exposition of "Honor War Theory" (HWT), we can make sense of paradigm instances of warrior psychology and behavior, and understand the warrior code as the martial expression of a broader honor-based ethos that conceives of obligation in terms of fair competition for prestige. Far from being a romantic and outmoded approach to war, HWT accounts for current conflicts and predicts moral intuitions that JWT either rejects or cannot comfortably accommodate. So although it is not recommended as a replacement for JWT, there is good reason think that a fully mature, realistic, and yet properly normative theory of war ethics will incorporate a variety of insights from HWT. (shrink)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. John W. Lango (2005). Preventive Wars, Just War Principles, and the United Nations. Journal of Ethics 9 (1-2):247 - 268.score: 24.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Jeff McMahan (2006). Killing in War: A Reply to Walzer. Philosophia 34 (1):47-51.score: 24.0
    Michael Walzer suggests that our common beliefs about individual responsibility and liability become largely irrelevant in the conduct of war. In conditions of war, everything is changed. (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Uwe Steinhoff (2012). The Moral Equality of Modern Combatants and the Myth of Justified War. Theoretical and Applied Ethics 1 (4):35-44.score: 24.0
    In the tradition of just war theory two assumptions have been taken pretty much for granted: first, that there are quite a lot of justified wars, and (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Laurie Calhoun (2001). The Metaethical Paradox of Just War Theory. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 4 (1):41-58.score: 24.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. H. G. Callaway (ed.) (2011). Alexander James Dallas: An Exposition of the Causes and Character of the War. An Annotated Edition. Dunedin Academic Press.score: 24.0
    Alexander James Dallas' An Exposition of the Causes and Character of the War was written as part of an effort by the then US government to explain (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Uwe Steinhoff (2007). On the Ethics of War and Terrorism. Oxford University Press.score: 24.0
    In this book Uwe Steinhoff describes and explains the basic tenets of just war theory and gives a precise, succinct and highly critical account of its present (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Nicholas Maxwell (2007). The Disastrous War Against Terrorism: Violence Versus Enlightenment. In Albert W. Merkidze (ed.), Terrorism Issues: Threat Assessment , Consequences and Prevention.score: 24.0
    In combating international terrorism, it is important to observe some basic principles, such as that international law must be complied with, care should be taken that one (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Uwe Steinhoff (2009). What Is WarAnd Can a Lone Individual Wage One? International Journal of Applied Philosophy 23 (1):133-150.score: 24.0
    Practically all modern definitions of war rule out that individuals can wage war. They conceive of war as a certain kind of conflict between groups. In fact, (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Christopher Toner (2010). The Logical Structure of Just War Theory. Journal of Ethics 14 (2):81-102.score: 24.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. John Forge (2009). Proportionality, Just War Theory and Weapons Innovation. Science and Engineering Ethics 15 (1):25-38.score: 24.0
    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 correspondinginterpretation (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Jeffrey Kovac (2013). Science, Ethics and War: A Pacifist's Perspective. Science and Engineering Ethics 19 (2):449-460.score: 24.0
    This article considers the ethical aspects of the question: should a scientist engage in war-related research, particularly use-inspired or applied research directed at the development of (...) the means for the better waging of war? Because scientists are simultaneously professionals, citizens of a particular country, and human beings, they are subject to conflicting moral and practical demands. There are three major philosophical views concerning the morality of war that are relevant to this discussion: realism, just war theory and pacifism. In addition, the requirements of professional codes of ethics and common morality contribute to an ethical analysis of the involvement of scientists and engineers in war-related research and technology. Because modern total warfare, which is facilitated by the work of scientists and engineers, results in the inevitable killing of innocents, it follows that most, if not all, war-related research should be considered at least as morally suspect and probably as morally prohibited. (shrink)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Seth Lazar (2013). Associative Duties and the Ethics of Killing in War. Journal of Practical Ethics 1 (1):3-48.score: 24.0
    this paper advances a novel account of part of what justifies killing in war, grounded in the duties we owe to our loved ones to protect them (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Seth Lazar (2012). The Morality and Law of War. In Andrei Marmor (ed.), Routledge Companion to the Philosophy of Law. Routledge.score: 24.0
    The revisionist critique of conventional just war theory has undoubtedly scored some important victories. Walzers elegantly unified defense of combatant legal equality and noncombatant immunity has (...)been seriously undermined. This critical success has not, however, been matched by positive arguments, which when applied to the messy reality of war would deprive states and soldiers of the permission to fight wars that are plausibly thought to be justified. The appeal to law that is sought to resolve this objection by casting it as a practical concern, a pragmatic worry about implementation, which while germane to debates over the laws of war, need not undermine our convictions in the fundamental principles the revisionists advocate. This response is inadequate. Revisionists have not shown that soldiers should obey the laws of war, in practice, when they conflict with their other moral reasonsour worries about application remain intact. Moreover, a theory of war that offers only an account of the laws of war, and a set of fundamental principles developed in abstraction from feasibility constraints, is radically incomplete. We need to know how to apply those fundamental principles, and whether, when applied, they lead to defensible conclusions. Only two options seem to remain. Perhaps the revisionistsarguments for their chosen fundamental principles are sufficiently compelling that we should stick with them, and accept their troubling conclusionsin other words, accept pacifism. Alternatively, we need to revise our fundamental principles, so that when applied they yield conclusions that we can more confidently endorse. -/- Though it does not save the revisionist view from the responsibility dilemma and cognate objections, the appeal to law does raise an important, and previously inadequately theorized, questionor, rather, resurrects a neglected topic, discussed in depth by historical just war theorists such as Grotius and Vattel. There are good grounds for distinguishing the laws of war from the morality of war, and for adjusting the former to accommodate predictable noncompliance, that should not impact on our account of the latter. Nonetheless, I have argued that there are some profound moral insights underlying both combatant legal equality and noncombatant immunity: specifically, we cannot infer from a combatants side having not satisfied jus ad bellum that he may not justifiably use lethal force; and other things equal, it is more wrongful to harm a nonliable noncombatant than to harm a nonliable combatant. (shrink)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Aaron Fichtelberg (2006). Applying the Rules of Just War Theory to Engineers in the Arms Industry. Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (4):685-700.score: 24.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Martin Shaw (2005). The New Western Way of War: Risk-Transfer War and its Crisis in Iraq. Polity.score: 24.0
    The new western way of war from Vietnam in Iraq -- Theories of the new western way of war -- The global surveillance mode of warfare -- Rules of (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Arash Abizadeh (2011). Hobbes on the Causes of War: A Disagreement Theory. American Political Science Review 105 (02):298-315.score: 24.0
    Hobbesian war primarily arises not because material resources are scarce; or because humans ruthlessly seek survival before all else; or because we are naturally selfish, competitive, or (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. H. G. Callaway (2008). Review of Schlesinger, War and the American Presidency. [REVIEW] Reason Papers 2008 (No. 30):121-128.score: 24.0
    This is a expository and critical review of Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. 's last book, War and the American Presidency. The book collects and focuses recent writings of (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Linda Johansson (2011). Is It Morally Right to Use Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) in War? Philosophy and Technology 24 (3):279-291.score: 24.0
    Several robotic automation systems, such as unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), are being used in combat today. This evokes ethical questions. In this paper, it is argued that (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Timothy Shanahan (ed.) (2005). Philosophy 9/11: Thinking About the War on Terrorism. Open Court.score: 24.0
    Fifteen philosophers turn their thoughts to international terrorism and the war that it has spawned, lending their expertise in law, ethics, politics, feminism, ...
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Jovana Davidovic (2012). International Rule-of-Law and Killing in War. Social Theory and Practice 38 (3):531-553.score: 24.0
    In this paper, I suggest that for some proposed solutions to global justice problems, incompatibility with the necessary features of international law is a reason to reject (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. A. J. Coates (1997). The Ethics of War. Distributed Exclusively in the Usa by St. Martin's Press.score: 24.0
    Drawing on examples from the history of warfare from the crusades to the present day, "The ethics of war" explores the limits and possibilities of the moral (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. John W. Lango (2010). Nonlethal Weapons, Noncombatant Immunity, and Combatant Nonimmunity: A Study of Just War Theory. [REVIEW] Philosophia 38 (3):475-497.score: 24.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. 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.score: 24.0
    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 theIndividual-Centric Approachto the deep morality of war, which asserts that the justifiability of an individuals contribution to the war, rather than the justifiability of the war more generally, determines the moral acceptability of their participation. It then goes on to present five implications of the Individual-Centric Approach, including for individual liability to attack in war. (shrink)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Troy Jollimore (2007). Terrorism, War, and the Killing of the Innocent. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 10 (4):353 - 372.score: 24.0
    Commonsense moral thought holds that what makes terrorism particularly abhorrent is the fact that it tends to be directed toward innocent victims. Yet contemporary philosophers tend to (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Gregory M. Reichberg (2010). Thomas Aquinas Between Just War and Pacifism. Journal of Religious Ethics 38 (2):219-241.score: 24.0
    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 (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Rory J. Conces (2009). Rethinking Realism (or Whatever) and the War on Terrorism in a Place Like the Balkans. Theoria 56 (120):81-124.score: 24.0
    Political realism remains a powerful theoretical framework for thinking about international relations, including the war on terrorism. For Morgenthau and other realists, foreign policy is a matter (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Darrell Cole (2012). Torture and Just War. Journal of Religious Ethics 40 (1):26-51.score: 24.0
    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 killing in battle. I will also argue that looking at torture through the perspective of the just war tradition forces us to place strictures on the practice that make it hard to justify, helps us to see why torture should never be legalized, helps us to clarify when circumstances might justify torture, and suggests what sort of character is required to recognize when those circumstances have occurred. (shrink)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Christopher Coker (2008). Ethics and War in the 21st Century. Routledge.score: 24.0
    Preface 1. Fighting Terrorism 1:1. A new Discourse on War? 1:2. Richard Rorty and the Ethics of War 2. Etiquettes of Atrocity 2:1. Etiquettes of (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Jeff McMahan (2009/2011). Killing in War. Oxford University Press.score: 24.0
    Jeff McMahan urges us to reject the view, dominant throughout history, that mere participation in an unjust war is not wrong.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Howard Adelman (2009). Research on the Ethics of War in the Context of Violence in Gaza. Journal of Academic Ethics 7 (1-2):93-113.score: 24.0
    The paper first demonstrates the ability to provode objective data and analyses during war and then examines the need for such objective gathering of data and analysis (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. 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.score: 24.0
    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 to war. Engagement with the new meta-theory reveals, however, that these purported advantages are illusory, made possible only by ignoring fundamental questions about the nature and function of political authority that are crucial to all moral reflection on the problem of war. (shrink)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Nick Fotion (2006). Two Theories of Just War. Philosophia 34 (1):53-64.score: 24.0
    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. (shrink)
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. John Kelsay (1993). Islam and War: A Study in Comparative Ethics. Westminster/John Knox Press.score: 24.0
    This book explores these questions and addresses the lack of comparative perspectives on the ethics of war, particularly with respect to Islam.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Uwe Steinhoff (2010). Benbaji on Killing in War and 'the War Convention'. Philosophical Quarterly 60 (240):616-623.score: 24.0
    Yitzhak Benbaji defends the view that soldiers on both thejustand theunjustside in a war have the same liberty right to kill one another, (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. John Marmysz (2002). War, Occupation, and Creativity. [REVIEW] Consciousness, Literature and the Arts 3 (2).score: 24.0
    A review of War, Occupation, and Creativity: Japan and East Asia 1920-1960, edited by Marlene Mayo and Thomas Rimer, with H. Eleanor Kerkham.
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Gaoshan Zuo (2007). Just War and Justice of War: Reflections on Ethics of War. [REVIEW] Frontiers of Philosophy in China 2 (2):280-290.score: 24.0
    War can be defined as organized political violence among two or more nations. In accordance with the purpose, processes and results of war, the ethics of war (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Phillip Montague (2010). War and Self-Defense: a Critique and a Proposal. Diametros 23:69-83.score: 24.0
    Discussions of the ethics of war commonlyand reasonablyassume that defensive wars are morally justified if any wars are. They also assume that explanations of (...)why defensive warfare is morally justified must be based on principles that also explain the moral justifiability of individual self-defense. David Rodin has recently argued that the second of these assumptions is mistaken, and he has developed an alternative account of the morality of defensive warfare. The purpose of this paper is to show that Rodins argument fails, and to explain how defensive warfare can indeed be justified in terms of principles that also apply to individual self-defense. (shrink)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Bill Wringe (2010). War Crimes and Expressive Theories of Punishment: Communication or Denunciation? Res Publica 16 (2):119-133.score: 24.0
    In a paper published in 2006, I argued that the best way of defending something like our current practices of punishing war criminals would be to base (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. J. Angelo Corlett (2010). Us Responsibility for War Crimes in Iraq. Res Publica 16 (2):227-244.score: 24.0
    This paper examines the recent actions by the United States in Iraq in the light of just war principles, and sets forth a program for holding accountable (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Saba Bazargan (2013). Complicitous Liability in War. Philosophical Studies 165 (1):177-195.score: 24.0
    Jeff McMahan has argued against the moral equivalence of combatants (MEC) by developing a liability-based account of killing in warfare. On this account, a combatant is (...)morally liable to be killed only if doing so is an effective means of reducing or eliminating an unjust threat to which that combatant is contributing. Since combatants fighting for a just cause generally do not contribute to unjust threats, they are not morally liable to be killed; thus MEC is mistaken. The problem, however, is that many unjust combatants contribute very little to the war in which they participateoften no more than the typical civilian. Thus either the typical civilian is morally liable to be killed, or many unjust combatants are not morally liable to be killed. That is, the liability based account seems to force us to choose between a version of pacifism, and total war. Seth Lazar has called thisThe Responsibility Dilemma”. But I will argue that we can salvage a liability-based account of warone which rejects MECby grounding the moral liability of unjust combatants not only in their individual contributions but also in their complicit participation in that war. On this view, all enlistees, regardless of the degree to which they contribute to an unjust war, are complicitously liable to be killed if it is necessary to avert an unjust threat posed by their side. This collectivized liability based account I develop avoids the Responsibility Dilemma unlike individualized liability-based accounts of the sort developed by McMahan. (shrink)
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Larry May & Emily Crookston (eds.) (2008). War: Essays in Political Philosophy. Cambridge University Press.score: 24.0
    War has been a key topic of speculation and theorizing ever since the invention of philosophy in classical antiquity. This anthology brings together the work of distinguished (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Michael Clark & Peter Cave (2010). Nowhere to Run? Punishing War Crimes. Res Publica 16 (2):197-207.score: 24.0
    This papers aim is to provide overview of the punishment of war crimes. It considers first the rationale of the law of war, the identification and (...)scope of war crimes, and proceeds to consider the justification of punishing war crimes, arguing for a consequentialist view with side-constraints. It then considers the alternative of reconciliation. (shrink)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Thomas Simpson (2011). Robots, Trust and War. Philosophy and Technology 24 (3):325-337.score: 24.0
    Putting robots on the battlefield is clearly appealing for policymakers. Why risk human lives, when robots could take our place, and do the dirty work of killing (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 1000