Ratio Juris 26 (1):47-64 (2013)

Authors
Vicente Medina
Seton Hall University
Abstract
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, by appealing to Aquinas' double-effect reasoning, it is shown how they try to avoid the above-mentioned incoherence. Still, their appeal might be insufficient to palliate the tension between the above-mentioned claims. If just wars are possible, the deliberate harming of the innocent is reasonably unavoidable for defeating and punishing those who wage them. Hence, defenders of just wars, whether from a religious or a secular perspective, must live with such a tension
Keywords Just War Theory  Francsico de Vitoria  Francisco Suarez  Catholic Just War Theory  Innocent Threats  Secular Just War Theory  Michael Walzer
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/raju.12002
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 71,410
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Leviathan.Thomas Hobbes - 1651 - Harmondsworth, Penguin.
Killing in War.Jeff McMahan - 2009 - Oxford University Press.
The Theory of Morality.Alan Donagan - 1977 - University of Chicago Press.
The Question of German Guilt.Karl Jaspers - 2008 - In Guénaël Mettraux (ed.), Perspectives on the Nuremberg Trial. Oxford University Press.
The Theory of Morality.Alan Donagan - 1982 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 13 (1):48-50.

View all 15 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Algunas notas sobre la teoría de la “guerra justa” en Francisco Suárez.Mauro Mantovani - 2017 - Sophia. Colección de Filosofía de la Educación 23:239-263.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Pacifism and Moral Theory.Jeff McMahan - 2010 - Diametros 23:44-68.
Innocence in War.Gabriel Palmer-fernández - 2000 - International Journal of Applied Philosophy 14 (2):161-174.
The Justification of Noncombatant Casualties in Wartime.P. A. Woodward - 2009 - International Journal of Applied Philosophy 23 (1):151-161.
Just War Theory In A Post-Cold War World.J. Bryan Hehir - 1992 - Journal of Religious Ethics 20 (2):237-257.
Defining War for the 21st Century.Steven Metz & Phillip R. Cuccia (eds.) - 2011 - Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College.
Making War on Terrorists—Reflections on Harming the Innocent.Thomas Pogge - 2008 - Journal of Political Philosophy 16 (1):1–25.
The Philosophy of War and Peace - by Jenny Teichman.Jacqueline Laing - 2009 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 26 (1):114-116.
Terrorism and War.Virginia Held - 2004 - The Journal of Ethics 8 (1):59-75.
The Laws of War.Jeff McMahan - 2010 - In Samantha Besson & John Tasioulas (eds.), The Philosophy of International Law. Oxford University Press.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2013-03-01

Total views
53 ( #216,053 of 2,519,862 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #270,671 of 2,519,862 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes