Switch to: Citations

References in:

Non-Combatant Immunity and War-Profiteering

In Helen Frowe & Lazar Seth (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Ethics and War. Oxford University Press (2017)

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Who is Morally Liable to Be Killed in War. [REVIEW]J. McMahan - 2011 - Analysis 71 (3):544-559.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   17 citations  
  • Walking the Tightrope of Just War. [REVIEW]B. J. Strawser - 2011 - Analysis 71 (3):533-544.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • The Responsibility Dilemma for Killing in War: A Review Essay.Seth Lazar - 2010 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 38 (2):180-213.
    Killing in War presents the Moral Equality of Combatants with serious, and in my view insurmountable problems. Absent some novel defense, this thesis is now very difficult to sustain. But this success is counterbalanced by the strikingly revisionist implications of McMahan’s account of the underlying morality of killing in war, which forces us into one of two unattractive positions, contingent pacifism, or near-total war. In this article, I have argued that his efforts to mitigate these controversial implications fail. The reader (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   38 citations  
  • Complicitous Liability in War.Saba Bazargan - 2013 - Philosophical Studies 165 (1):177-195.
    Jeff McMahan has argued against the moral equivalence of combatants (MEC) by developing a liability-based account of killing in warfare. On this account, a combatant is morally liable to be killed only if doing so is an effective means of reducing or eliminating an unjust threat to which that combatant is contributing. Since combatants fighting for a just cause generally do not contribute to unjust threats, they are not morally liable to be killed; thus MEC is mistaken. The problem, however, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  • Liability and Just Cause.Thomas Hurka - 2007 - Ethics and International Affairs 21 (2):199-218.
    This paper is a response to Jeff McMahan's "Just Cause for War". It defends a more permissive, and more traditional view of just war liability against McMahan's claims.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • The Morality of War and the Law of War.Jeff McMahan - 2008 - In David Rodin & Henry Shue (eds.), Just and Unjust Warriors: The Moral and Legal Status of Soldiers. Oxford University Press. pp. 19--43.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   20 citations  
  • Duty and Liability.Victor Tadros - 2012 - Utilitas 24 (2):259-277.
    In his recent book, Killing in War, Jeff McMahan sets out a number of conditions for a person to be liable to attack, provided the attack is used to avert an objectively unjust threat: (1) The threat, if realized, will wrongfully harm another; (2) the person is responsible for creating the threat; (3) killing the person is necessary to avert the threat, and (4) killing the person is a proportionate response to the threat. The present article focuses on McMahan's second (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Limiting the Killing in War: Military Necessity and the St. Petersburg Assumption.Janina Dill & Henry Shue - 2012 - Ethics and International Affairs 26 (3):311-333.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Guns, Food, and Liability to Attack in War.Cécile Fabre - 2009 - Ethics 120 (1):36-63.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   32 citations  
  • Pacifism and Moral Theory.Jeff McMahan - 2010 - Diametros 23:44-68.
    There is a nonabsolute or “contingent” form of pacifism that claims that war in contemporary conditions inevitably involves the killing of innocent people on a scale that is too great to be justified. Some contingent pacifists argue that war always involves a risk that virtually everyone that one might kill is innocent – either because one can never be sure that one’s cause is just or because even most of those who fight in wars that lack a just cause are (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Contingent Pacifism and the Moral Risks of Participating in War.Larry May - 2011 - Public Affairs Quarterly 25 (2):95-112.
    The just war tradition began life, primarily in the writings of Augustine and other Church Fathers, as a reaction to pacifism. In my view, contemporary just war adherents should also see pacifism as their main rival. The key question of the just war tradition is how to justify war, given that war involves intentionally attacking or killing innocent people. And this justificatory enterprise is not an easy one. Today some theorists argue that some, but not all, soldiers are liable to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations