首页> 外文期刊>Journal of military ethics >THE MORAL EQUALITY OF COMBATANTS -A DOCTRINE IN CLASSICAL JUST WAR THEORY? A RESPONSE TO GRAHAM PARSONS
【24h】

THE MORAL EQUALITY OF COMBATANTS -A DOCTRINE IN CLASSICAL JUST WAR THEORY? A RESPONSE TO GRAHAM PARSONS

机译:战斗人员的道德平等-经典战争理论中的学说?对格雷厄姆·帕森斯的回应

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Contrary to what has been alleged, the moral equivalence of combatants (MEC) is not a doctrine that was expressly developed by the traditional theorists of just war. Working from the axiom that just cause is unilateral, they did not embrace a conception of public war that included MEC. Indeed, MEC was introduced in the early fifteenth century as a challenge to the then reigning just war paradigm. It does not follow, however, that the distinction between private and public war had no place in the traditional teaching. Thomas Aquinas and his successors did not analyse just war by extrapolation from the related idea of self-defense. Rather, they likened just war to a legal proceeding that could solely be undertaken by persons possessed of legitimate authority. For this reason, just war was first and foremost public war. Private war was deemed 'war' only in a secondary and reduced sense of the term. It was accordingly understood that public war should be waged and its morality judged by reference to a set of norms that are not directly reducible to those governing private self (and other)-defense.
机译:与所称的相反,战斗人员的道德对等并不是一种由正义战争的传统理论家明确发展的学说。从公正原因是单方面的公理出发,他们没有接受包括MEC在内的公共战争的概念。实际上,MEC于15世纪初问世,它是对当时统治正义的战争范式的挑战。但是,在传统的教学中并没有把私人战争和公共战争之间的区别放在首位。托马斯·阿奎那斯及其继任者并没有从有关自卫思想的推断中分析战争。相反,他们将正义战争比喻为只能由拥有合法权力的人进行的法律程序。因此,正义战争是首要的公共战争。私人战争仅在其次要意义上被认为是“战争”。因此,人们了解到,应当通过参照一套不能直接归结于统治私人自卫(和其他自卫)的准则来进行公共战争,并对其道德进行判断。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号