phil5w10_Lecture_Mar4

phil5w10_Lecture_Mar4 - Just War Doctrine contd. Boyles...

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
“Just War Doctrine” cont’d. Boyle’s position: We are justified in defending against an ongoing series of actions, but we are not justified in anything as broad as trying to rid the world of terrorism. Questions When Congress decides to wage war, how does one determine whether its intention is right? Should “right intention” be a requirement for a just war, or is this an inappropriate extension of personal ethics to the political sphere? If war can be morally justified only as a last resort, then small, relatively weak groups are far more likely than the U.S. to meet the requirements. Considering the massive damage that the U.S. can do through economic sanctions, when can we ever honestly claim that we must resort to war?
Background image of page 1

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

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Douglas Lackey, “Nipping Evil in the Bud: The Questionable Ethics of Preventive Force” Distinguishes between three kinds of force: Preventive , used against someone who might do an evil act, Preemptive , used against someone who will do an evil act, and
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.

This note was uploaded on 09/28/2011 for the course PHILOSOPHY 100 taught by Professor None during the Fall '11 term at UC Irvine.

Page1 / 6

phil5w10_Lecture_Mar4 - Just War Doctrine contd. Boyles...

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