Intentions and consequences in military ethics

Journal of Military Ethics 10 (2):81-93 (2011)

Authors
Peter Olsthoorn
Netherlands Defence Academy
Abstract
Utilitarianism is the strand of moral philosophy that holds that judgment of whether an act is morally right or wrong, hence whether it ought to be done or not, is primarily based upon the foreseen consequences of the act in question. It has a bad reputation in military ethics because it would supposedly make military expedience override all other concerns. Given that the utilitarian credo of the greatest happiness for the greatest number is in fact agent-neutral, meaning that the consequences to everyone should weigh equally, this critique of utilitarianism is not entirely fair. By focusing on some anomalies in both the principle of double effect and in our tendency to give priority to the interests of those who are near and dear to us, this article argues that there is something to be said for a military ethic that attaches less weight to intentions, and more to the consequences.
Keywords double effect  intention  Just War Tradition  obligation  utilitarianism
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1080/15027570.2011.593711
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive
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

Moral Dimensions: Permissibility, Meaning, Blame.Thomas Scanlon - 2008 - Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
The View From Nowhere.Thomas Nagel - 1986 - Oxford University Press.
What We Owe to Each Other.Thomas Scanlon - 1998 - Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Reasons and Persons.Derek Parfit - 1984 - Oxford University Press.
Famine, Affluence, and Morality.Peter Singer - 1972 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 1 (3):229-243.

View all 34 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Double Effect, Double Intention, and Asymmetric Warfare.Steven Lee - 2004 - Journal of Military Ethics 3 (3):233-251.
Scanlon on Permissibility and Double Effect.Jakob Elster - 2012 - Journal of Moral Philosophy 9 (1):75-102.
Civilian Starvation: A Just Tactic of War?Claire Thomas - 2005 - Journal of Military Ethics 4 (2):108-118.
War and Intention.Darrell Cole - 2011 - Journal of Military Ethics 10 (3):174-191.
Scanlon on Double Effect. [REVIEW]Ralph Wedgwood - 2011 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 83 (2):464-472.
Who is Entitled to Double Effect?Joseph Boyle - 1991 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 16 (5):475-494.
Collateral Damage and the Principle of Due Care.Anne Schwenkenbecher - 2014 - Journal of Military Ethics 13 (1):94-105.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2011-07-21

Total views
739 ( #4,865 of 2,285,436 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
26 ( #34,067 of 2,285,436 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature