1 / 13

War and Peace

War and Peace. Aims for this lesson:. Review Just War principles Consider Pacifism and Realism NB Some exercises here from Robert Bowie Ethical Studies (2nd edition, Nelson Thornes , 2004) can be used for discussion. Just War – the origins and key players.

adler
Download Presentation

War and Peace

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. War and Peace

  2. Aims for this lesson: • Review Just War principles • Consider Pacifism and Realism NB Some exercises here from Robert Bowie Ethical Studies (2nd edition, Nelson Thornes, 2004) can be used for discussion.

  3. Just War – the origins and key players • Aristotle 4th C BCE – war for self defence is just (Early Christians were pacifist before Constantine converts in 312 AD) • Early Christian thinkers – Augustine and Ambrose war is justified to defend threats against the faith. Use OT as example. • And this leads to…

  4. St Thomas Aquinas 13th C Conditions for when it’s right to fight – called ‘jus ad bellum’: • Right authority • Just Cause (eg self-defence, defence of others) • Just Intention (eg seeking peace) Check what these mean – pages 279-280 in Bowie (2nd edition 2004)

  5. “A just war is wont to be described as one that avenges wrongs, when a nation or state has to be punished for wrongs inflicted by its subjects”. • Aquinas Summa Theologica II-II Q40

  6. Further ‘jus ad bellum’ conditions: 16th + 17th C – Francisco Suarez and Franciso de Vittoria • Last resort – Falklands War? • Reasonable chance of success • Proportionality (eg disproportional to go to war over fishing rights)

  7. How war should be fought – ‘jus in bello’ • Proportionality – read the explanations – relate it to the recent Gulf War • Discrimination over targets – why is this increasingly relevant?

  8. Evaluating Just War • accepts that war is sometimes necessary but… • maintains moral principles • retains respect for human rights Criticisms from realists: • War is more complicated than this – no single ‘just cause’ eg 2009 Gaza Conflict • Can’t always predict outcomes – Vietnam, length of Gulf War etc • Unrealistic to expect fighters to be moral thinkers eg Gaza fighting in civilian areas against guerillas. • Who is the innocent civilian?

  9. Jus post bellum • Proportionality (don’t humiliate eg 1918) • Discrimination (punish leaders, not civilians) • Financial aid (eg US Marshall Plan) • Rehabilitation (eg new constitution, guarantees of rights, police reform etc)

  10. Pacifism Inspired by: • Buddhist principles • The example of Jesus – rejecting option of force even is self defence eg “Love your enemies”. Recent pacifists who have both argued for non violent resistance’: • Gandhi – “I object to violence because when it appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent.” • Desmond Tutu

  11. Criticisms of Pacifism • Takes right to decide away from victim. • Some people appear to be evil – e.g. the holocaust – and will not be affected by Non Violent Resistance. • The examples of pacifists being conquered by ruthless powers (see page 284)

  12. Christian Realism Reinhold Niebuhr ‘Moral Man and Immoral Society’ (1932) • Human nature is evil – therefore force is necessary to maintain society • States have different moral rules to individuals • Pacifism is a heresy – Love will not guarantee victory!! • God’s will requires us to be pro-active in the world

  13. Conclusion: • Pacifism seems to deny the individual self defence and history shows it is not always successful and what’s more, can end in atrocities. • Realism permits states too much freedom – surely there should be limitations?

More Related