Philosophical Quarterly 60 (240):616-623 (2010)
AbstractYitzhak Benbaji defends the view that soldiers on both the ‘just’ and the ‘unjust’ side in a war have the same liberty right to kill one another, because soldiers have ‘tacitly accepted’ the egalitarian laws of war and thereby waived their moral rights not to be attacked. I argue that soldiers on the ‘just’ side have not accepted the egalitarian laws of war; even if they had, they would not thereby have waived their moral rights not to be attacked. Moreover, the egalitarian laws of war and ‘the war convention’ are not fair and mutually beneficial, and so would not be accepted. Benbaji does not come to grips with the problem of the killing of civilians in war: his idea that states could waive the moral rights of their citizens is untenable
Similar books and articles
Licence to Kill? The Question of Just Vs. Unjust Combatants.Lene Bomann-Larsen - 2004 - Journal of Military Ethics 3 (2):142-160.
Innocence in War.Gabriel Palmer-Fernández - 2000 - International Journal of Applied Philosophy 14 (2):161-174.
Using Shakespeare's Henry V to Teach Just-War Principles.L. Perry David - 2005 - Teaching Ethics (January).
When Is It Right to Fight? Just War Theory and the Individual-Centric Approach.James Pattison - 2013 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16 (1):35-54.
Defining War for the 21st Century.Steven Metz & Phillip R. Cuccia (eds.) - 2011 - Strategic Studies Institute, U.S. Army War College.
Michael Walzer's Just War Theory: Some Issues of Responsibility. [REVIEW]Igor Primoratz - 2002 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 5 (2):221-243.
The Responsibility of Soldiers and the Ethics of Killing in War.Yitzhak Benbaji - 2007 - Philosophical Quarterly 57 (229):558–572.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads