29 - Phil 140: Combatants in War Combatants in War 8/29/07...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Phil 140: Combatants in War 8/29/07 2:00 PM Combatants in War Why are we justified in killing combatants, and not non combatants, in war? Two claims: 1. It’s permissible to kill combatants in war. 2. It’s impermissible to kill noncombatants in war. Who are the combatants? Geneva convention: member of the armed forces A distinction in status, not behavior Deflating answer (deflationary): The rule of the game (but want a deeper answer) ANSCOMBE-RANSEY ARGUMENT: 1. Enemy combatants are not innocent(ly involved in war) 2. Its permissible to kill people who aren’t innocent in war. Conclusion: It’s permissible to kill combatants in war. 1’. Non-combatants are innocent(ly involved in war) 2’. It’s impermissible to kill the innocent. Conclusion: Impermissible to kill non-combatants. MAVRODES’S OBJECTION 1. is false: involuntary conscripts
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
1’. is false- enthusiastic war supports who aren’t in the
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 5

29 - Phil 140: Combatants in War Combatants in War 8/29/07...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online