Just-War Theory, NLT, and DDE

War

(1) a state of usually open and declared armed hostile conflict between states of nations; (2) a period of such armed conflict

Kantian Theory

Kant's Humanity formulation of the categorical imperative, which requires that one treat others not merely as means to one's own ends but as ends in themselves, sometimes figures in discussions of the morality of war, terrorism, and torture; used to evaluate acts of terrorist torture that involve harming individuals as a means of intimidating others

Hot War

a conflict involving actual fighting

Cold War

a conflict over ideological differences carried on by methods short of sustained overt military action and usually without breaking off diplomatic relations

Preventive War

a first strike against the potential future aggressor who does not yet pose an imminent threat

Intrinsic Permissibility

action, apart from its effects, must be morally permissible

Last Resort

all reasonable alternatives must be exhausted

Just-War Theory

an extension of natural law ethics applied to the issue of war; makes the common distinction between questions about jus ad bellum and jus in bello

Torture

any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as [1] obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, [2] punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or [3] intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or [4] for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity

Non intentionality

bad effect is not intended

Necessity

bad effect is unavoidable, and thus action is necessary if the good effect is to be brought about

Proportionality

badness of the bad effect is not grossly out of proportion to the goodness of the good effect being sought

Acceptance Value

concrete acts of torture would be wrong from a rule consequentialist perspective if a rule prohibiting torture in those circumstances would result in a greater level of net intrinsic value than would a rule permitting torture in those circumstances

Preemptive War

conflict that occurs after a nation presents a clear imminent threat to another country

Walter Sinnott-Armstrong

critical of standard interpretations of the just-cause provision that are taken to rule out all preventative wars

Discrimination

deaths of innocent noncombatants must not be directly intended either as an end of the military action or as a means to some further military purpose

David Rodin

defends a rights-based theory of self-defense and argues that preventive wars cannot be morally justified on any plausible interpretation of this sort of theory

Theory of Intrinsic Value

four basic intrinsic goods [1] human life, [2] human procreation, [3] human knowledge, [4] human sociability (includes friendship, social organizations, and political organizations)

Andrew Valls

if provisions of just-war theory can morally justify some wars, they can also morally justify some acts of terrorism

Interrogation Torture

includes act 1 in the torture definition

Terrorist Torture

includes acts 2, 3, and 4 in the torture definition

Consequentialism

may take either an act or a rule form; considers not the values of the likely consequences of the specific but rather the values of the likely consequences of the general acceptance of various alternative rules under which the action and its alternatives fall

Doctrine of Double Effect (DDE)

meant to address the question of whether it is ever morally permissible to knowingly bring about evil consequences in the pursuit of some good; cases where an action would produce at least some good effects but at least one bad effect; an action that would bring about at least one evil effect and at least one good effect is morally permissible if the following conditions are satisfied (listed below):

Military necessity (jus in bello)

military activity in question must be judged to be necessary in order to bring about some justifiable military end

Political Proportionality

must be proportional to the wrong being resisted

Legitimate Authority

officials of a recognized government

Just Cause

restrictive interpretation would require that the war be one of self-defense, in which a government is responding to violent aggression or is attempting to prevent imminent violent aggression by another state

Prospect of Success

room for interpretation; means weighing the victory of war with the death toll and other negative consequences

Michael Walzer

says that all acts of terrorism are morally wrong and examines various "excuses" that have been offered in defense of terrorist acts

Natural Law Theory (NTL)

the idea of morality being natural; traced to St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274); bases rights action on considerations of intrinsic value; an action is right if and only if in performing the action one does not directly violate any of the basic values

Jus In Bello

the morality of activities within war

Jus Ad Bellum

the morality of going to war

Terrorism

the use of threat of violence against innocent people to elicit terror in them, or in some other group of people, in order to further a political objective

Moral Nihilism

the view that moral considerations do not apply to war, that questions of moral right and wrong, good and bad do not apply because war creates a context in which "anything goes"

Antiwar Pacifism

wars are always (or at least nearly always) morally wrong. Basis: idea that all intentional killing of human beings is morally wrong

Military Proportionality

whatever good end the military action in question is supposed to serve, the likely evil that results from the activity must not be grossly out of proportion to the intended good ends of that activity