전쟁은 우리의 생존을 위협하는 비극적인 재앙이기 때문에 그것은 피하거나 막아야 할 부도덕(immoral)하고 사악한 행위로 인식되는 것이 일반적이다. 하지만 전쟁이라는 사회현상은 현실적으로 우리의 호불호와 관계없이 인류와 함께 존재해왔으며, 우리가 그것을 피할 수 있는 방법이 없다는 점에서 비도덕적(amoral)인 사건이나 상태로 보는 관점도 있다. 과연 전쟁이 인류사회에 불가피한 현상이라면 우리는 그것을 윤리적으로 어떻게 인식해야 하는가는 인류의 미래를 위해서도 중요한 문제가 아닐 수 없다. 어떤 윤리학적 관점에서든 윤리는 궁극적으로 선과 악을 분별하고 인간의 행위에서 선을 이끌어 내거나 촉진시켜야 할 사명을 가진다. 우리가 전쟁을 윤리의 영역으로 끌어들여서 논의의 대상으로 삼는 일은 전쟁을 피하는 것이 아니라 전쟁의 참화로부터 인류를 구하기 위한 근본 처방을 찾는 일이다. 우리는 전쟁을 일단 윤리의 영역으로 끌어들이더라도 전쟁 본질 자체부터 그 원인과 목적에 이르기까지 윤리적 관점으로 인식하는 일이 우선되어야 한다. 그리고 현실의 전쟁 실제에 대한 기존의 접근 방식을 윤리적 인식과 평가의 준거에 따라 재조명하고 해석함으로써 정당화 가능한 윤리적 전쟁관의 근거를 마련하게 된다. 전쟁 실제에 대한 윤리적 인식은 세 가지의 관점, 즉 전쟁이 도덕적으로 절대 정당화될 수 없다는 윤리적 비관론과 전쟁을 윤리의 영역에서 논의할 이유가 없다는 윤리적 무관론, 그리고 인간사회에 전쟁이 불가피하며 일부 전쟁은 도덕적으로 정당하다는 윤리적 낙관론에서부터 출발한다.
The purpose of this paper is to provide not merely the ethical standpoint to war through studying the essential meaning of itself but the point of view to morally justify some war in reality. In spite of a kind of social phenomenon and the fact that the principal agent of war is human. we are apt to think that war is irrelevant to ethics. There are three points of view that recognize the war with ethical perspective. The first point of view, ethical pessimism at war such as extreme pacifism takes the position regarding war as an absolute evil, claiming that war must be eliminated on the Earth. The second point of view, the stream of thought on war irrelevant to ethics being called the realism claims that the war has nothing to do with morality, being only political object and purpose. Those who are in this position believe a war to be a political question, and not an ethical one. The third point of view, ethical optimism to war which is called either practical pacifism or just war theory allows us to identify that some war may be morally justified. If we're at a third position of view, the matter raises a problem of how to justify it. It is important for us to morally justify a war since justification of the war makes the military conducting it stand up for its service and take pride in the values of its work. Of these opinions on war, two former ones may aggravate evil of war by ruling the room for ethics out from the field on war, while latter one deals with a war as a question of ethics due to the fact that human being cannot help breaking out it in the real world.
The purpose of this paper is to provide not merely the ethical standpoint to war through studying the essential meaning of itself but the point of view to morally justify some war in reality. In spite of a kind of social phenomenon and the fact that the principal agent of war is human. we are apt to think that war is irrelevant to ethics. There are three points of view that recognize the war with ethical perspective. The first point of view, ethical pessimism at war such as extreme pacifism takes the position regarding war as an absolute evil, claiming that war must be eliminated on the Earth. The second point of view, the stream of thought on war irrelevant to ethics being called the realism claims that the war has nothing to do with morality, being only political object and purpose. Those who are in this position believe a war to be a political question, and not an ethical one. The third point of view, ethical optimism to war which is called either practical pacifism or just war theory allows us to identify that some war may be morally justified. If we're at a third position of view, the matter raises a problem of how to justify it. It is important for us to morally justify a war since justification of the war makes the military conducting it stand up for its service and take pride in the values of its work. Of these opinions on war, two former ones may aggravate evil of war by ruling the room for ethics out from the field on war, while latter one deals with a war as a question of ethics due to the fact that human being cannot help breaking out it in the real world.