Within the past decade there has been numerous “violent acts that were deliberately intended to inflict harm on those who did not deserve to be harmed” as stated in “Ethics: Theory and Contemporary Issues” by Barbara MacKinnon and Andrew Fiala. These violent acts called terrorism exemplifies the tragedies including: 9/11, Iraq’s WMD, the bombing of the Boston Marathon, the Sand Hook Elementary School shooting, and etc. Although these terrorist actions continue throughout the world, nevertheless, the American government’s disposition and retaliation has caused the citizens of the United States to raise numerous diversified ethical questions of the justifiability to the act of violence and war. In result, I will provide information concerning
…show more content…
One method is pacifism. Pacifism is the commitment to nonviolence and opposition to war (associated with Gandhi and King). It is related to deontological concerns by the focus on the morality of killing. Deontological pacifists will maintain that there is an absolute moral rule against killing. The other method, realism, is the view on ethics of war that maintains that limits on warfare are merely pragmatic or prudential and that the goal is strength and victory. Realism is related to consequentialist concerns due to the fact that realism is primarily focused on outcomes and results—and who are not as concerned with the morality of the means employed to achieve such results. On the other hand, the just war theory is the mean between the two extremes. The just war theory is considered a middle path because it is the idea that the use of force, including military force, is justified in limited and specific circumstances. This theory is about the justification of war that maintains that war should be limited by moral concerns. Philosophers and theologians developed the just war idea over time as they attempted to find moral language to criticize and limit the destructive power of
One method is pacifism. Pacifism is the commitment to nonviolence and opposition to war (associated with Gandhi and King). It is related to deontological concerns by the focus on the morality of killing. Deontological pacifists will maintain that there is an absolute moral rule against killing. The other method, realism, is the view on ethics of war that maintains that limits on warfare are merely pragmatic or prudential and that the goal is strength and victory. Realism is related to consequentialist concerns due to the fact that realism is primarily focused on outcomes and results—and who are not as concerned with the morality of the means employed to achieve such results. On the other hand, the just war theory is the mean between the two extremes. The just war theory is considered a middle path because it is the idea that the use of force, including military force, is justified in limited and specific circumstances. This theory is about the justification of war that maintains that war should be limited by moral concerns. Philosophers and theologians developed the just war idea over time as they attempted to find moral language to criticize and limit the destructive power of