Authority and harm in war
Two features of warfare are particularly ethically striking. Firstly, and most obviously, war involves killing and maiming on a grand scale. Secondly, war involves large numbers of individuals obeying the commands of those who claim to possess authority over them, such as their superior officers and political leaders. Whereas leading contemporary work on the ethics of war focuses on the former aspect, this thesis investigates the relevance of the latter. The project is orientated around a discussion of the traditional just war requirement that wars be waged by a âlegitimate authorityâ, and makes three central contributions. Firstly, I argue that the authority criterion plays a much more important role within just war theory than is commonly supposed. Rather than simply imposing a necessary condition for justifying the resort to war, the criterion also plays a crucial role in judgements about the permissibility of individualsâ conduct in war. More specifically, the criterion captures the idea that individuals who fight on behalf of a certain type of entity are subject to a more extensive range of permissions to cause harm than those that apply to private actors. Secondly, I assess the extent to which
Parry, Jonathan
Authority and harm in war. Two features of warfare are particularly ethically striking. Firstly, and most obviously, war involves killing and maiming on a grand scale. Secondly, war involves large numbers of individuals obeying the commands of those who claim to possess authority over them, such as their superior officers and political leaders. Whereas leading contemporary work on the ethics of war focuses on the former aspect, this thesis investigates the relevance of the latter. The project is orientated around a discussion of the traditional just war requirement that wars be waged by a âlegitimate authorityâ, and makes three central contributions. Firstly, I argue that the authority criterion plays a much more important role within just war theory than is commonly supposed. Rather than simply imposing a necessary condition for justifying the resort to war, the criterion also plays a crucial role in judgements about the permissibility of individualsâ conduct in war. More specifically, the criterion captures the idea that individuals who fight on behalf of a certain type of entity are subject to a more extensive range of permissions to cause harm than those that apply to private actors. Secondly, I assess the extent to which
authority harm war feature warfare particularly ethically strike firstly obviously war involve kill grand scale secondly war involve_large number_individual obey command claim possess authority superior officer political_leader whereas lead contemporary work ethic war focus former aspect investigate relevance latter project orientate around discussion traditional war requirement war wag legitimate_authority make central contribution firstly_argue authority criterion play much important_role within war theory commonly suppose rather_simply impose necessary_condition justify resort war criterion also play_crucial_role judgement individual conduct war specifically criterion capture idea individual fight behalf certain_type entity subject extensive range permission cause harm apply private actor secondly assess_extent