Department of Philosophy
University of Hawai'i at M noa
e-mail: stroble@hawaii.edu
Dissertation:
Abstract:
I seek to show, through consideration of both the ethics of war and conceptions of war, that war cannot be a means for the creation or enforcing of social or political order. Initially, an argument is made for the moral considerability of war, against the positions of political realism and socio-biology. Such a moral consideration, I maintain, requires a coherent conception of war, and consistency between that concept and ethical norms that traditionally apply to war. Thus I attempt to derive a coherent and morally justifiable concept of war from generally accepted rules of war, especially the principle of non-combatant immunity from attack.
Two concepts emerge as possibilities: war as conflict resolution by the arbitration of arms, and war as law enforcement. Taking up the first, I consider its historical roots in trial by combat and the duel, and show the consistency of the rules of war with this concept, by an application of the discourse ethics of Jrgen Habermas and Karl-Otto Apel. However, I find there is no connection between this concept of war and the ends it allegedly serves. I conclude that duelling can only be rational insofar as it concerns individual self-identity, and thus has no political application.
The law enforcement model is addressed by a consideration of the just war tradition, primarily in the work of its founder, Saint Augustine. I argue that a consistent reading of Augustine reveals that the justification of war must be in terms of its instrumentality in producing peace. This in turn depends on assumptions of the efficacy and the necessity of the use of violence.
I here turn to the classical Chinese tradition, and suggest that Confucians deny both the efficacy and necessity for the use of violence. The issue then centers around the legitimate use of violence, and the denial that the efficacy of violence can itself produce that legitimacy. The necessity for the use of force, therefore, is the admission of the loss of legitimacy, and therefore also the loss of justification. Just war is therefore an incoherent concept.
I conclude that war cannot be justified as an ethical activity. Therefore by default pacifism becomes the only ethical position.