Preview

Pacifism vs Just War Theory

Best Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1393 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Pacifism vs Just War Theory
Albert Einstein once said, “You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war.” Although Einstein is considered one of the greatest thinkers in history, he was surely not an ethicist. Regardless, his statement of pacifism, should not be taken lightly. In passages such as “Pacifism” by Douglas P Lackey pacifism and it many forms are defined and justified as valid moral theories . Initially pacifists such as Albert Schewerzer considered it wrong to kill and this was their central concept , over time the ideas by which pacifists are defined became more specific in some cases, while more broad in others. Famous visionaries such as Mahatma Ghandi and Leo Tolstoy have gone down in history for their peaceful and somewhat passive moral theories. In their theory these universal pacifists specified that it was immoral to take place in violence in cases of personal affairs or between nation-states. “Private pacifists” believe that personal violence is morally wrong but political violence is right in certain cases. These pacifists believe that it is sometimes permissible for nations to go to war. Finally the last type of pacifists think personal violence is sometimes wrong but war is always morally wrong , this type of pacifist is called an anti-war pacifist. In this essay I will be comparing and contrasting “Pacifism” by Douglas P Lackey and the listed forms of pacifism with just war theory arguments addressed in passages such as Michael Walzer’s “Terrorism: A Critique of Excuses”.
As rational creatures, everything that we do is reasoned out. Whether consciously or unconsciously, everything that we do is for a purpose, and is somehow justified by our minds. We do not simply do things out of instincts, or merely of habits, but out of a conscious decision of what is right and what is wrong. The logical question to this is of course, how do we decide what is right or wrong in our personal lives? On an even larger scale, how do we apply this theory of right and wrong in
Continue Reading
View Writing Issues

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Powerful Essays

    Outline the concepts of just war and pacifism
    • 1943 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Outline the concepts of just war and pacifism

    The Just war theory maintains that war may be justified if fought only in certain circumstances, and only if certain restrictions are applied to the way in which war is fought. The theory that was first propounded by St Augustine of Hippo and St Ambrose of Milan ( 4th and 5th centuries AD) attempts to clarify two fundamental questions: ‘when is it right to fight?’ and ‘How should war be fought?’. Whereas Pacifists are people mainly Christians who reject the use of violence and the deliberate killing of civilians but claims that peace is intrinsically good and ought to be upheld either as a duty and that war can never be justifiable. However, Realists agree that, due to the nature of humans, force is a necessary action to be used to maintain a just and ordered society. Therefore, since the Second World War, people have turned their attention to Just War again establishing rules that can serve as guidelines to a just war- the Hague and Geneva conventions.…

    • 1943 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Analysis Of Aldous Huxley's An Encyclopedia Of Pacifism
    • 103 Words
    • 1 Page

    Analysis Of Aldous Huxley's An Encyclopedia Of Pacifism

    Aldous Huxley provides strong and valid points in An Encyclopedia of Pacifism favoring the widespread use of pacifism. He actively responds to critics throughout his essay while also providing his own ideas and opinions about certain subjects. The main focuses of his argument is if war is a natural state and the justification of pacifism. While Huxley admits that pacifism is not a perfect policy, he also feels that it has not been implemented on a large enough scale to show its real effects. One thing is for certain though and that is war will not be the permanent solution to addressing indifferences.…

    • 103 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Society's Argumentative Essay: The Conflict Of War
    • 66 Words
    • 1 Page

    Society's Argumentative Essay: The Conflict Of War

    To conclude, there is no doubt that the conflict of war is a useless encounter that affects many innocent people’s lives, the economic stability and physiological wellbeing of soldiers. It is evident that in some circumstances society makes war to ensure peace, and on the surface this seems rational, even plausible. However, in reality throughout the journey there is a great human and economic cost…

    • 66 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Just War
    • 634 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Just War

    Force should be used when there are legitimate reasons for using it, and when it is the last resort for the government, who is responsible for civic peace. Elshtain uses Augustine to discuss justice and war. A paradox between war and peace is introduced, Elshtain uses an Augustine quote to discuss the similarity of two words that are complete polar opposites, “Peace and war had a contest in cruelty, and peace won the prize.” In history, there are many instances where evil and horrible things are done in the name of ‘peace’. Elshtain continues with the early Christian beliefs that under Jesus’ teaches forbid force in anyway, even under authority. Later, it transforms to the necessity of force to protect others. This leads to the four qualifications that Elshtain wrote to justify a war, the first is that the war must be publicly declared by a legitimate jurisdiction. The second criteria is that an unjust violence must have occurred against the government’s own people or a defenseless group. Third, the war has to be start with the proper motives. Finally, all other alternatives must be exhausted before leading to war. In the end, Elshtain includes a final criteria that must be met for a war to be ‘just’, the possibility of actually winning the conflict. If there is no chance of succeeding, the conflict should not be…

    • 634 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Just War Proponents Vs Pacifists
    • 1379 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Just War Proponents Vs Pacifists

    “War, what is it good for”? The lyrics to the 60’s pop song, provokes the question that Just War proponents and Pacifists have wrestled with throughout history, reaching opposite conclusions. Those in favor of Just War theory, say war is only good insofar as it is fought for the right reasons and brings about the right end. Whereas, Pacifists reject war completely, preferring peaceful means to resolve conflict. But which one is morally and ethically right? Which one should be adopted and practiced by the Nations of this World? Upon examining the logic and philosophical implications of each ethical stance, one is able to sympathize with them both, seeing their values and virtue.…

    • 1379 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Just And Unjust War Analysis
    • 1585 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Just And Unjust War Analysis

    A large sector of just war theory references several moral and legal implications that must be evaluated prior to engaging in attack. The legalist paradigm, as expressed by theorist and author Michael Walzer in his book Just and Unjust Wars1, evaluates the conditions that constitute just war, and elaborates on several of the key circumstances that are required to impose just war on others. Despite its strengths, this paradigm is often evaluated as being a “strawman”, and provides only a foundation for which several other nuanced views can expand on. One fundamental idea expressed in his claims though, is the idea that “nothing but aggression can justify war”1. Through this, Walzer establishes the only moral precedent for which a counter-attack…

    • 1585 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Philosophy's Just War theory
    • 670 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Philosophy's Just War theory

    (e) “The just war theory makes war fair” Discuss this statement. You should include different, supported points of view and a personal viewpoint. You must refer to Christianity in your answer. [12]…

    • 670 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    Just War Pacifism
    • 2476 Words
    • 10 Pages

    Just War Pacifism

    Human beings have been fighting with each other since prehistoric times, and people have been discussing the rights and wrongs of it. The Ethics of War begins by assuming that war is a bad thing, and should be avoided if possible, but there can be situations when war may be catastrophic. War is a bad thing because it involves deliberately killing or injuring people, and this is a fundamental wrong. The purpose of war ethics is to help decide what is right or wrong, both for individuals and countries, and to contribute to debates on public policy, and ultimately to government and individual action.…

    • 2476 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Just War Theory
    • 815 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Just War Theory

    One important theory within International Relations shows a moral aspect on how to conduct war. This theory is called Just War Theory. Just War Theory is a doctrine of military ethics from a philosophical and Catholic viewpoint. This theory consists of two parts: Jus ad bellum (the right to go to war) and Jus in bello (right conduct within war).…

    • 815 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Just War Theory Obsolete Essay
    • 612 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Just War Theory Obsolete Essay

    The just war theory is concerned with ethically justifying war with acceptable warfare techniques (Moseley, 2009). It can be argued that in light of modern day nuclear power, the just war theory is obsolete. The central claim of this paper is that this notion is true; war is immoral and cannot be justified. To defend this claim, this paper will be taking a deontological approach and present counter arguments in favour of utilitarianism.…

    • 612 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Frankenstein: The Modern Day Prometheus
    • 499 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Frankenstein: The Modern Day Prometheus

    Human beings have been at battle with one another since prehistoric times, and people have been discussing the rights and wrongs of it for almost just as long. The purpose of war ethics is to help decide what is right or wrong, both for individuals and countries, and to contribute to debates on public policy, and ultimately to government and individual action. War ethics also lead to the creation of formal codes of war, the drafting and implementation of rules of engagement for soldiers, and in the punishment of soldiers and others for war crimes. War ethics are a highly controversial topic and many people’s opinions differ on the subject. For instance, there are individuals who believe that war is bad because it involves deliberately killing or injuring people. These people also believe that war is a fundamental wrong and an abuse of the victims’ human rights. People opposing the war may even extend further with the idea or theory of pacifism. There are several different forms of pacifism, but they all include the idea that war and violence are unjustifiable, and that conflicts should be settled in a peaceful manner. Many people believe that pacifism is more than opposition to war. They argue that it must include action to promote justice and human rights. This is where those who believe that war isn’t particularly good nor bad but believe it may be necessary and do not see it as wrong come into the picture. The people for war believe that war should be fought if there is a just cause, has been lawfully declared, the intention behind the war is good or pure, other plans of resolving issues had been tried first, there is a reasonable chance of success, and the means must be in proportion to the end that the war seeks to achieve. Many individuals for war argue that it is important to acknowledge the difference between the moralities of pacifism as it applies to an individual, and the application…

    • 499 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    The Just War Theory
    • 1946 Words
    • 8 Pages

    The Just War Theory

    What justifies war? Who justifies it? Why as human beings do we feel the need to fight, harm, and kill others to achieve certain goals? These questions have been pertinent to our society since the beginning of time and continue to challenge us to better understand the human psyche, and code of ethics that give Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Coast Guardsmen, and Marines credence to kill in the name of the United States of America. These ethics of war lay the foundation for that code of understanding and righteousness for when it is justifiable to pull the trigger and take the life of another, or commit an act of war.…

    • 1946 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Just War Essay
    • 557 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Just War Essay

    Many extreme pacifists reject the concept of just war and all justifications for violence. I actually disagree with the extreme pacifist that rejects the concept of just war and all justifications for violence. I feel that sometime war is something that just has to be done in order for people to solve curtain conflicts. St. Augustine is the known as the first one actually noted to be the founder of the theory of just war. A Just war is a theory that deals with the reason on why and how curtain wars are fought. The concept on a just war can be justified by concept of just war or the historical origin of just war reasoning. The just war aspect is about the ethical reasons on why they war is justified, and if that was last step that could have been…

    • 557 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Pacifism and Conscientious Objection
    • 2917 Words
    • 12 Pages

    Pacifism and Conscientious Objection

    During the 20th century America has been involved in many conflicts that have led to war or the taking up of arms against other humans and nations. Although the vast majority of Americans have blindly accepted these actions throughout the century, more and more people are seeing war as morally wrong. Reasons for this epiphany are based off of a variety of things and encompass many other aspects related to war and killing examples include: due to moral and ethical principles, objection to war due to strong religious beliefs, the objection to violence due to the same ideals above, objection to the government 's use of force, and the objection to the use of weapons of mass destruction.…

    • 2917 Words
    • 12 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    War Can Be Justified Analysis
    • 1929 Words
    • 8 Pages

    War Can Be Justified Analysis

    Living by this moral principle can cause a greater harm by turning the other cheek than by using force to deminish a greater threat. There is always going to be people seeking out power or people who have different beliefs and morals because it is engraved within ourselves through generation after generation. Jan Narveson directly states a pacifists view, "His belief is not only that violence is evil but also that it is morally wrong to use force to resist, punish, or prevent violence. We are aggressive and greedy people and to change the thinking of the entire world with out the threat of force seems nearly impossible. Hypathetically, if pacifism was put into law, the use of any type of force will be breaking the law and the sentence is life in prison. Now imagine if a man breaks into a house of a young lady and rapes this lady and then pulls a gun out to shoot her. If the woman grabs the gun and shoots the man, she would also be sent to prison for life because any use of force is labelled as unacceptable. In our society today, violence is happening everyday even though we have laws in place to minimize them. Violence is not only a thing of the past but it is a thing of the future and without a proper punishment, violence will increase drastically. Narveson communicates a second version of pacifism where " one might argue that pacifism is desirable as a tactic: that as a matter of fact, some good end, such as the reduction of violence itself , is to be achieved by 'turning the other cheek'. " This again is a good theory, but if it was put into action, the consequences would be great. A human has the right to defend themselves, or help a person that is in need. In war it is the same thing but instead of one person needing help, it is a population worth of needed help. A person claiming they are a pure hearted pacifist by " turning the other cheek" does not necessarily make it the best…

    • 1929 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More

Related Topics