Switch to: References

Citations of:

Proportionality and necessity

In Larry May (ed.), War: Essays in Political Philosophy. New York: Cambridge University Press (2008)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. The Problem with Killer Robots.Nathan Gabriel Wood - 2020 - Journal of Military Ethics 19 (3):220-240.
    Warfare is becoming increasingly automated, from automatic missile defense systems to micro-UAVs (WASPs) that can maneuver through urban environments with ease, and each advance brings with it ethical questions in need of resolving. Proponents of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) provide varied arguments in their favor; robots are capable of better identifying combatants and civilians, thus reducing "collateral damage"; robots need not protect themselves and so can incur more risks to protect innocents or gather more information before using deadly force; (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • An African Theory of Just Causes for War.Thaddeus Metz - 2020 - In Luís Cordeiro-Rodrigues & Danny Singh (eds.), Comparative Just War Theory. New York: Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 131-155.
    In this chapter, I add to the new body of philosophical literature that addresses African approaches to just war by reflecting on some topics that have yet to be considered and by advancing different perspectives. My approach is two-fold. First, I spell out a foundational African ethic, according to which one must treat people’s capacity to relate communally with respect. Second, I derive principles from it to govern the use of force and violence, and compare and contrast their implications for (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Samaritanism and Civil Disobedience.Candice Delmas - 2014 - Res Publica 20 (3):295-313.
    In this paper, I defend the existence of a moral duty to disobey the law and engage in civil disobedience on the basis of one of the grounds of political obligation—the Samaritan duty. Christopher H. Wellman has recently offered a ‘Samaritan account’ of state legitimacy and political obligation, according to which the state is justified in coercing each citizen in order to rescue all from the perilous circumstances of the state of nature; and each of us is bound to obey (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • (1 other version)Necessity in Self-Defense and War.Seth Lazar - 2012 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 40 (1):3-44.
    It is generally agreed that using lethal or otherwise serious force in self-defense is justified only when three conditions are satisfied: first, there are some grounds for the defender to give priority to his own interests over those of the attacker (whether because the attacker has lost the protection of his right to life, for example, or because of the defender’s prerogative to prefer himself to others); second, the harm used is proportionate to the threat thereby averted; third, the harm (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   53 citations  
  • The Ethics of War. Part II: Contemporary Authors and Issues.Endre Begby, Gregory M. Reichberg & Henrik Syse - 2012 - Philosophy Compass 7 (5):328-347.
    This paper surveys the most important recent debates within the ethics of war. Sections 2 and 3 examine the principles governing the resort to war (jus ad bellum) and the principles governing conduct in war (jus in bello). In Section 4, we turn to the moral guidelines governing the ending and aftermath of war (jus post bellum). Finally, in Section 5 we look at recent debates on whether the jus ad bellum and the jus in bello can be evaluated independently (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • War and poverty.Kieran Oberman - 2019 - Philosophical Studies 176 (1):197-217.
    Because the poorest people tend to die from easily preventable diseases, addressing poverty is a relatively cheap way to save lives. War, by contrast, is extremely expensive. This article argues that, since states that wage war could alleviate poverty instead, poverty can render war unjust. Two just war theory conditions prove relevant: proportionality and last resort. Proportionality requires that war does not yield excessive costs in relation to the benefits. Standardly, just war theorists count only the direct costs: the death (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Proportionality and combat trauma.Nathan Gabriel Wood - 2024 - Philosophical Studies 181 (2):513-533.
    The principle of proportionality demands that a war (or action in war) achieve more goods than bads. In the philosophical literature there has been a wealth of work examining precisely which goods and bads may count toward this evaluation. However, in all of these discussions there is no mention of one of the most certain bads of war, namely the psychological harm(s) likely to be suffered by the combatants who ultimately must fight and kill for the purposes of winning in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • (1 other version)Distributive Justice for Aggressors.Patrick Tomlin - 2020 - Law and Philosophy 39 (4):351-379.
    The individualist nature of much contemporary just war theory means that we often discuss cases with single attackers. But even if war is best understood in this individualist way, in war combatants often have to make decisions about how to distribute harms among a plurality of aggressors: they must decide whom and how many to harm, and how much to harm them. In this paper, I look at simultaneous multiple aggressor cases in which more than one distribution of harm among (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Killing and Rescuing: Why Necessity Must Be Rethought.Kieran Oberman - 2020 - Philosophical Review 129 (3):433-463.
    This article addresses a previously overlooked problem in the ethics of defensive killing. Everyone agrees that defensive killing can only be justified when it is necessary. But necessary for what? That seemingly simple question turns out to be surprisingly difficult to answer. Imagine Attacker is trying to kill Victim, and the only way one could save Victim is by killing Attacker. It would seem that, in such a case, killing is necessary. But now suppose there is some other innocent person, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Opportunity Costs Pacifism.James Pattison - 2020 - Law and Philosophy 39 (5):545-576.
    If the resources used to wage wars could be spent elsewhere and save more lives, does this mean that wars are unjustified? This article considers this question, which has been largely overlooked by Just War Theorists and pacifists. It focuses on whether the opportunity costs of war lead to a form of pacifism, which it calls ‘Opportunity Costs Pacifism’. The article argues that Opportunity Costs Pacifism is, at the more ideal level, compelling. It suggests that the only plausible response to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Ética en la guerra: la distinción entre soldados y civiles.Francisco Lara - 2013 - Revista de Filosofía (Madrid) 38 (2):79-98.
    In war a soldier behaving properly should take into account a universal requirement not to kill, to be applied strictly in dealing with civilians, but at the same time to support the exception of taking the life of enemy combatants as an act of selfdefense. This is the usual way to distinguish morally the proper treatment to soldiers and civilians. In this article the author criticizes it and outlines a different way to understand and justify the moral distinction mentioned.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Compensation and the Scope of Proportionality.Linda Eggert - 2022 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 122 (3):358-368.
    This paper examines whether the prospect of compensation may render otherwise disproportionate harms proportionate. It argues that we should reject this possibility. Instead, it distinguishes duties of compensation as a requirement of rectificatory justice from a harm’s degree of compensability, and argues that only the latter is relevant to proportionality. On this view, failing to compensate constitutes a distinct wrong, while harms that are not adequately compensable carry extra weight in proportionality calculations. This explains how the prospect of compensation affects (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • (1 other version)Jus in bello Necessity, The Requirement of Minimal Force, and Autonomous Weapons Systems.Alexander Blanchard & Mariarosaria Taddeo - 2022 - Journal of Military Ethics 21 (3):286-303.
    In this article we focus on the jus in bello principle of necessity for guiding the use of autonomous weapons systems (AWS). We begin our analysis with an account of the principle of necessity as entailing the requirement of minimal force found in Just War Theory, before highlighting the absence of this principle in existing work on AWS. Overlooking this principle means discounting the obligations that combatants have towards one another in times of war. We argue that the requirement of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Reconciling Just Causes for Armed Humanitarian Intervention.Eamon Aloyo - 2016 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 19 (2):313-328.
    Michael Walzer argues that the just cause for humanitarian intervention is not met if there are only “ordinary” levels of human rights abuses within a state because he believes that respecting the right to collective self-determination is more morally important than protecting other individual rights. Several prominent critics of Walzer advocate for a more permissive account of a just cause. They argue that protecting individuals’ human rights is more morally important than respecting a right to collective self-determination. I argue that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Just War Theory and the Last of Last Resort.Eamon Aloyo - 2015 - Ethics and International Affairs 29 (2):187-201.
    The last resort criterion has a hallowed place in the just war theory tradition. Many leading just war theory scholars accept it as ajus ad bellumrequirement and some powerful politicians reference it. While there are several versions of last resort, many take it to mean that peaceful options that have a reasonable chance of achieving a just cause must be exhausted before the use of force is permissible. Its justification is straightforward and commonsensical: war is terrible, inevitably results in the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations