+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Jmc Ethics College Notes

Jmc Ethics College Notes

Date post: 05-Sep-2015
Category:
Upload: ussrecount2358
View: 220 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
Description:
ethics class notes
Popular Tags:
63
NE203 Ethics Complete Notes 23 August 2004 to 08 December 2004 (Weeks 1 to 16)
Transcript

David Underhill NE203 Ethics Notes (1st Half):_23 Aug 04 - 11 Oct 04 (1st - 8th Weeks)

NE203 Ethics

Complete Notes

23 August 2004 to 08 December 2004 (Weeks 1 to 16)by David Underhill

David Underhill NE203 Ethics Notes (1st Half):_23 Aug 04 - 11 Oct 04 (1st - 8th Weeks)David Underhill 30 Aug 04 (1st Week) p.3-7, 9-11, 13-19 (EMP); p13-16 (CS)

Ethics and the Military in America (3)

Purpose of ethics course is to develop ones ability to make ethical decisions and explain those decisions

US officers get their basic values from the nations documents (Constitution)

It can be difficult to interpret there have been many Supreme Court rulings on it

The Frustrations of Ethics (3)

There is no single formula to clearly find the right ethical answer to any ethical question

A short course on ethics would not do justice to the rich moral heritage and profound concepts behind it

What Might We Gain From the Study of Ethics? (4)

New members of the armed forces have to learn that loyalty to the truth over shipmates, etc. is required

All members must understand that the US fights wars ethically not victory by any means

This makes war more difficult, more costly

The Role of Philosophy in Morality (5)

Only through serious reflection can we improve our understanding of ethics

On the Eve of Battle (George R. Lucas) (9)

About Capt. Erskine, USMC in Kuwait awaiting for orders to invade Iraq (2003)

Wondered why the US didnt get involved in Sierra Leone, Congo, etc.

Despite his beliefs, he was proud to serve the Marines and lead his men into Iraq

He was inspired by a Brit LtCol who reminded his men that they were there to liberate

Erskine was KIA, becoming one of the first casualties in the war (caught crossfire)

The Ring of Gyges (Plato) (13)

Asks why even bother to have morals

To do wrong is naturally good, to be wrong is naturally bad; suffering far exceeds the good

As a result, men make laws so they dont inflict injury upon each other

Every organism naturally desires gain and pursues it

Both just and unjust men have this desire

Just men will follow laws in place, however, which check this desire

Every man believes that committing injustices serves themselves better than being just

Why is Ethics so Hard? (Grassey, Stockdale) (15)The Perspective of the Individual (15)

In most situations, we easily identify right from wrong and hardly think about it

Moral Complexity life does not always offer a clear choice; there will be pros and cons to both sides

Ethics made hard from:

Morality changes

Pressure from time and the limits of knowledge

Greatest difficulties arise when we have to discern human motivations

Emotions can influence self-control

A moral individual may make an immoral or poor decision due to emotions; they may even realize it is the worse decision but go ahead with it because of strong emotions

Perspectives on Organizations (16)

Ethics is not just about the individual

The organizations what really matters each person within should fall under its morals

To rise in rank, one must master the culture of the service, including its ethics

Personal and professional ethics are different and separate

Some Thoughts on Theory (18)

Two extremes of ethics

Low: they specify the minimum level of performance

High: they specify the ideal

Three approaches to making ethical decisions

Absolute rules written in law, clear; Ex: POWs should not be tortured

Consequences of actions and what one should do to achieve the best results

What is the intent of the person?

Ethics is described as the high country of the mind by Robert Pirsig

You must consider hard questions because our beliefs depend on our answers

The Bottom Line (19)

We are bound to uphold our professions ethical code

Bottom line: we may have to sacrifice ourselves in service

We cannot rely on ourselves to judge our judgment

We have the responsibility to get external assistance to improve our moral deliberations

Being an officer requires strict adherence to the military ethic

Rescuing the Boat People (CAPT Rick Rubel) (13)

A US LPD comes upon a boat of refugees

The captain stops the LPD near them

The refugees try to swim to the LPD but the captain refuses to let them aboard

The captain has the XO check the boat and OPS tell him the rules for embarking refugees

The boat appears seaworthy, though they say theyd lost 20 men already

The LPD is on a mission and embarking refugees could be dangerous

With twenty dead already, it seems they must be having some serious problems

David Underhill 2nd Week Constitutional Ethics

Monday 30 Aug 2004 P.63-80

The US Constitution and the Moral Foundations of Military Service: Conflicts of Principles and Loyalties (63)

Warrior Code of Conduct

Non-combatants are immune

Treat POWs with restraint

Use deadly force only when justified

Countries are viewed as having the right to run themselves as they see fit

US Officer Commission Oath

Commit loyalty to the Constitution the framework for universal moral principles is contained within it

Protect interests with even-handed impartiality

Commitment to sacrifice

Self for shipmate, shipmates for ship, ship for the mission

Even minor disobedience of reasonable orders shows a profound betrayal of trust

Either obey or resign

Natural Law vs. State Law

Even well-intentioned democratic gov can be guilty of moral error

Disobedience is a last resort other paths to remedy the problem must be attempted

The Moral Foundations of Military Service Martin Cook (65)

Ethics of Military Service Clausewitz the real purpose of the military is to serve the national interest if so then:

Rhetoric about military virtues is a screen to hide the fact that the military only serves national interests

Only absolute pacifists deny the right to self-defense (resist border incursion, protect lives)

Self-defense often stretched to encompass vague ideas

States Importance

States with boundaries and political heads not like todays until the Reformation

After the 30 Years War, the Peace of Westphalia was established to prevent religion from causing further war

Emphasized war was for defense of territory and political

Sovereign states analogous to a free individual, able to pursue the life and beliefs of their choosing, free from interference from others

Role of the military is to defend a political and social order from threats

Officer must serve with integrity and professionalism

Not their responsibility to assess the states or wars moral worth

Killing for Ones Country

One must serve the state as it is, not as a fantasy state that does no wrong

Just and Unjust Wars, Walzer: One serves the state to protect the common lives shared by citizens

The sacrifice required by common life must be willingly accepted to have moral justification

GEN Eisenhowers Attitude: refusing to meet with the German GEN because he believed that professional soldier was not on the same moral level as he was

Suggests a new thinking about warfare

Kuwait was a good example of the Westphalian paradigm, but it is tainted because of oil

Kosovo was legit but the protest was that Kosovo was not of the nations interest

If this is why we stayed out, then claims to moral justifications are false and the war is just politics

Reasons to serve

Westphalian answer (defense of common life)

Universalizing answering terms of transcendent moral and political values

Ethics in Military Service (71) Growing gap exists between military and civilians

Could lead to the military believing itself morally superior to civilian culture

Could also cause a loss of mutual trust and respect

People are drawn to the military for benefits (education, training, travel)

People stay in the military because they see an ideal human community grounded in service to others

Constitutional Ethics Col Paul E. Roush (Ret.) (75)

Initial fear of a standing army caused its control to be distributed between branches

Placing power in the hands of a small minority was seen as inviting tyranny

Presidential Constraints Commander-In-Chief, so he has authority over all military commanders

Congressional Constraints Power of the purse; regulates the armed forces UCMJ, admin stuff ($, retirement, etc)

Judicial Constraints few cases; usually give wide latitude

Supreme Law of the Land

Military cannot ignore Congress

Agreements the US makes are binding on its military too (Geneva, etc)

Constitutional Paradigm four principles guide its practical application

1. Priority of loyalties: Constitution, Mission, Service, Ship, Shipmate, Self

2. Resolve conflicting loyalties then act

3. Follow the above principles or resign

4. If the act is believed to be a greater evil than disobeying the above, then disobeying an order to attain a higher good can be a worthwhile risk, though it may result in severe consequences prerequisites for this:

Fundamental violation of justice; non-trivial

Attempt to remedy the problem before choosing disobedience

Dont hide disobedience make it public, and warn superiors in advance

Must be willing to accept full legal consequences

We are taught to disobey orders so that we can be autonomous agents

Applies to things that will haunt you NOT trivial

P.47 64, 81 90 (Wednesday 01 SEPT 2004)

A Higher Moral Standard for the Military LtCol J. Carl Ficarrotta, USAF (47)

Military believed to be bound by a higher moral standard

Higher Moral Standard (47)

Unique moral obligations for military professionals

Military has good reasons for being bound more strictly to moral standards

Officers have so much authority that they should be very concerned for the welfare of those who they affect

Moral requirements due to the unique situations and contexts encountered by military professionals

Does not indicate how one will act outside a military context

Combat is high stress and stress can wear away at morals

Important to be morally steadfast

The Functional Line (50)

Hackett claims a bad person cannot be a good soldier

Each member of a unit must be honest with each other

As applies to the military

Few understand the level and intensity of cooperation required

Many functions facilitated by clear moral standards

Failure can result in bad consequences

Functional line does not establish that the military professional has special reasons to be good

Service is unphased if soldier puts himself after service, but gives nothing to charity

Should be disappointed of situations like these

No functional reason to be strict outside the military context, however

Functional reasons for being strict in other contexts

Moral failure outside the military can hint at potential for failure in the military (cheating on taxes, etc)

Appearance of morality is functional

Gains support and funding from the public

A degree of trust is needed because appearances can be deceiving

Superiors behavior affects subordinates must set the tone

Demands of the Role (53)

Moral requirements may extend beyond what is functionally required

Obligations are different from others (like a policeman must step in to stop a crime while a normal citizen does not)

Cheating on taxes, neglecting your children, etc. are expected of everyone, not just those in a military role

Bound because the public expects a higher standard and military professionals agree to that when joining

Have to be careful because public sentiment could disappear

Or worse, it could change to something immoral, in which case morality must be pursued and public sentiment ignored (Nazi Germany)

Group Image (55) - Lack of morals in one hurts the whole group

Moral Standards and Military Leadership Leon A. Edney, ADM USN (Ret.) and Henry Chiles, Jr. ADM USN (Ret.) (59)

A number of people in public and the military both fail ethically

It is important to maintain our own high standards

Hold those who fail accountable

US must hold a high standard to convince allies to remain such

A breach of ethics is a failure of leadership

Dual standards are not acceptable

Stephen Carters three requirements for ethical actions on integrity issues

Discern what is right and wrong based on the facts

Act to correct wrongs

Openly justify your actions

Main Ideas

Learn from past mistakes

Confidence in leadership affects military readiness and ability to accomplish the mission

Actions speak louder than words

Know what you stand for

Loyalty is important to both your superiors and your subordinates

Letter from Birmingham City Jail Dr Martin Luther King Jr. (81)

Injustice is a threat to justice everywhere

Nonviolent campaign steps (4)

Collect facts to determine injustices

Negotiate

Self-purification

Direct Action seeks to dramatize the issue so it cannot be ignored

Justice too long delayed is justice denied

Two types of laws: just and unjust

Unjust law out of harmony with moral law

an unjust law is no law at all

Just law man-made code that doesnt infringe on moral law

Morals means must be used to attain moral ends

Friday: 03 SEPT 04 p.25-28, 39-44 (CSME)

USS Vincennes Friend or Foe Ed. By Capt Rick Rubel (25)

USS Vincennes

Capt Rogers eagerly engaged the small gunboats

When the incoming target was flagged as potentially hostile, nobody double-checked the petty officer to ensure he had checked the scheduled flights correctly

The petty officers reports were not caught as incorrect by anyone in CIC

Based on the information the captain had, the shot he took was appropriate

Acting on Conscience: Captain Lawrence Rockwood in Haiti Written by Dr. Stephen Wrage (39)

Capt Lawrence had intel about severe abuse in Haitian prisons

He confronted his chain of command and appropriate officers without success

He continued up the chain of the command, not giving up

His efforts eventually resulted in special forces entering a prison, and they confirmed the horrible conditions (skin peeling off, concentration camp like starvation, etc.)

David Underhill 3rd Week Taking an Ethical Stand: Relativism

Monday: 08 Sept 04 p.25-42 (EMP)The Relativity of Moral Beliefs and Situations (25) Oath does not define what action to take in every case; merely rules out some options

Leaders are decision makers

Moral Relativism morals are dependent upon their acceptance by others

No one is privileged enough to determine what is right or wrong

Each person must decide what he believes; When in Rome, do as Romans do

We are responsible for our beliefs so before acting we should make sure we are morally justified (not just accepted by the current culture surrounding us)

Military officers should be morally sound

To provide society a good example

Because it cultivates good leaders

Relativism and Objectivism: Are there Universal Values? (Barton Porter) (39)

Relativist values reflect our culture only

Support this by pointing out that various cultures with different and changing beliefs all believe they are right

Admirable because it is 1) tolerant of other views; 2) allows freedom to determine own views; 3) uncertainty about what values need to be defended

Objectivist acts can be defined as right or wrong, and certain purposes as better than others

Rejects relativist support saying various beliefs just indicate how clearly a culture sees values

Just b/c scientists thought the Earth was flat and then round doesnt mean both are right

Argues diversity between cultures may be just be the appearance, not reality

The Challenge of Cultural Relativism (James Rachels) (29)

How Different Cultures Have Different Moral Codes (29)

Ex: Eskimos lived without outside influence for a long time

When first discovered, they seemed to have little regard for human life

They shared wives with visitors and neighbors, practiced infanticide, and left the old to die

Shows how conceptions of right and wrong differ greatly from culture to culture

Cultural Relativism (30)

Different societies have different morals

There is no objective standard / universal truth to judge a set of morals with

It is arrogant to try to judge other cultures

The Consequences of Taking Cultural Relativism Seriously (32)

We cannot say others morals are inferior could not criticize slavery, anti-Semitism, etc.

We could decide right wrong based on our societys culture stops us from criticizing our own value

Idea of moral progress is false changes cant be for better or worse

Why There Is Less Disagreement Than It Seems (33)

The belief system may be the cause of what appear to be different values

For example, if a society thought it was wrong to eat cows because they thought after death your soul stayed in a cows body, then the disagreement would be over where the soul goes, not values about whether it is right or not to eat cows

How All Cultures Have Some Values in Common (34)

Moral rules which are necessary for continued existence will be common to all viable societies

Why Thoughtful People May Be Reluctant To Criticize Other Cultures (35)

Nervousness about interfering with the social customs of others

A desire to be tolerant of others

Do not wish to express contempt towards the society being criticized

What Can Be Learned From Cultural Relativism (36)

It is dangerous to assume our values are based on an absolute standard

Keep an open mind

Herodotus: If anyone were given a choice between which countrys morals they would choose, they would inevitably choose their own countrys morals over any others.

Wednesday: 10 Sept 04 p.43-46 (EMP); p.165-166 (CS)

Ethical Pluralism: An Alternative to Objectivism and Relativism (Lawrence Lengbeyer) (43)

Many see objectivism and relativism as the only options

Many choose relativism because they think it is better to stifle judgment than be indefensibly arrogant

Objectivism seen as far-fetched, egotistical

Pluralism there can be multiple correct answers to an ethical question

So an ethical question does have incorrect answers, but is not limited to a single correct answer

Supported by if you ask who was the best baseball player, there can be a number of different, correct answers with good support as well as many wrong answers

Our Values or Theirs? (CAPT Rick Rubel) (165)

Mission: sell major weapon systems to Saudi Arabia Ministry of Defense Advantages to US include:

Save $500M (lower production costs)

Strengthen diplomatic, military, and economic ties with the ally

Provide more jobs

Capt James had little time to put his team together; found out in the airport the US lawyer was female

One of their best lawyers

In Saudi Arabia, women cannot conduct business, buy from a store, sit in the front seat, etc.

It is only 55min until the flight leaves

By bringing her, he may jeopardize the mission

By leaving her here, he may misspeak and cost the US

Capt respects the religious basis that founds these Saudi beliefs

Wonders whether he should bring her (equal opportunity, after all) or leave her and try to explain that there culture prohibits her from fulfilling her role

David Underhill Week 4 Religion and the Military

Monday 13 Sept 2004: P.107-112; 119-123

Religion and Military Ethics (107)

Morals are influenced by religion in those who believe

It is dangerous to think morals are sent down directly from God

This makes it possible for morals to be changed or suspended by God

Morality seems like it should remain constant

Some believe Gods intelligence and goodness ensure his actions are moral

Less threatening because then God does not set and cannot change morals

Others argue (on the basis of Abraham) that morality has nothing to do with religion

The Readings

Discuss the proper relationship between religious convictions and moral obligations

Cook: argues religious beliefs help form and explain the basis of morality

Rachels: argues morality defined by religion is paradoxical based on Greek scholars

Eberle: defends morality and religion by attacking Platos argument

Religion may not be the sole basis for actions by military personnel

Reality Check: The Human and Spiritual Needs of Soldiers (Chaplain Brinsfield) (109) Soldiers are reluctant to discuss religion because it is perceived to be very personal

Strong observance of religion is perceived as being detrimental to the unit

Most religions worship a deity though some promote wisdom, etc.

Religion has become more diverse in the US: 45 to 2,000 specific religions in 60 years

Most important intangible assets: morale, lan, espirit de corps, the will to combat, and the will to win

Morale most influenced by leading by example and unit cohesion

Moral is an expendable commodity

Brits in WWII noticed soldiers peak ability was the first 90 days of combat

After that, it declines until the soldier is useless (around 140 days)

10-15% of casualties were psychiatric casualties

Four elements of support which help to cope with combat stress

Rightness of the war; unit cohesion from hard training, sports, and rewards; selfless leadership; and a desire for religious fortification before battle

Manchester on Okinawa (USMC): through prayer he realized he was there to fight for his comrades and a greater purpose than himself

A soldiers ability to draw on his religion is an undeniable component of readiness

Does Morality Depend on Religion? (James Rachels) (119)Connection between morality and religion

People often associate religion with morality and therefore call on priests to give ethical advice

A world without religion and a higher power lacks values according to Russel in A Free Mans WorshipThe Divine Command Theory (120)

Commanded by God means moral, and the reverse means immoral

Pros: solves the relativism / objectivism debate

Right and wrong is objective; those who dont obey will be held accountable at death

Problems

Cannot apply to atheists

Main problem (Plato) Is conduct right b/c the gods cmd it, or do the gods cmd it b/c it is right? both problematic:

If it is right because god commands it, then it is arbitrary because god could have commanded the opposite makes it impossible to label god as good

If god commands it because it is right, then there exists a standard of right and wrong, which means morals cannot be defined in terms of gods will

Many religious people believe the latter because it would be impious to do otherwise

Some theologians say the latter is impious as it doesnt allow morals to be defined by gods will

Some theologians reject this however (see below)

The Theory of Natural Law (122)

Says morals are decided by reason

Argues that god made natural law and us rational

This allows non-believers to use reason to determine morals just as easily as believers

Morality, like science, is autonomous of religion with its own way of being understood

Religious people believe the understandings of morality as being revealed by god

Allows non-believers and believers to participate in the same moral universe

Wednesday 15 Sept 2004: P.113-118, 125-129

Religion and Morality: Exploring the Connections (Cook) (113)

Historical Observations

Western religions honor Moses and Gods revelation to him

Many look to religion to know how to act morally

Many believe god grounds morals (without him, anything is allowed)

Many expect religious leaders to live up to higher standards

The Historical Problem: morals are arbitrary if determined by God and if they come from rational thought then it transcends rational morals

Religion and Rationality: Religious Synthesis (114)

Natural law says (see previous notes); allows believers and non-believers to participate in morality

Those who developed arguments about this synthesis and natural law have been prosecuted in their own time

Author believes religion will adopt forms of natural law for other principles as well so that non-believers can conform too

The Contribution of Religion to Morality (115)

Claims that religion must be the basis of morality threatens morality itself and is not well-grounded in religious thinking

Religion has an impact on the moral life of individuals through

The sort of person one is religion tries to influence how children are raised and how people think about things like love

Reasons for being moral gratitude to god

Religion and the interpretation of the circumstances of action situations described in the Bible form foundations for actions now

Religion and morality have complex relationships

Religion profoundly impacts those who follow it

Natural law allows religion to share its morality with non-believers

A Philosophical Defense of Divine Command Theory (Eberle) (125)

Euthyphro Dilemma some use it refute DCT; Eberle claims it only refutes a caricature of DCT

Does god command what is right arbitrarily or based on a universal standard he is passing down

Since god is perfect and loving he would only issue moral orders

As a result, DCT is founded because the orders are not arbitrary because god would never order you to do the wrong thing

Friday 17 Sept 2004: P.137-144 (CSME)

A Shipboard Request for Abortion (Rubel, Martini) (137)

Background: A CO can grant emergency if an immediate family member is terminally sick or has been killed; the CO can reject a valid request (particularly if it interferes with operations); transportation logistics may take some time to get the person home

Abortion: Supreme court has ruled it legal, but law does not allow military doctors to perform elective abortions

SecNav Shipboard Pregnancy Regs: will serve until 20th week; must return by 4mo. after delivery; pilots grounded

The ship is nearing a foreign port visit in four days and a 3rd class petty officer requests emergency leave to go back to the US and have an abortion (requested via chit)

Chit approved by all below the CO who is deeply religious and opposed to abortion

The CO tells her that the request doesnt quite meet the regs and asks why she wants the abortion

She says she is only 19 and wants to attend college and trying to raise a child alone would hurt her future

Altering the Uniform (Gunther) (139)

An Air Force officer (orthodox Jew) sues to be allowed to wear a yarmulke with his uniform

Supreme Court Justices reject his claims and forbid him to wear it, citing the fact the USAF made a decision not based on religion, but on uniformity and professionalism

Other justices dissented, saying his yarmulke had no impact on those around, and therefore he should be allowed to wear it

David Underhill - Week 5 Consequential Reasoning

Monday 20 Sept 2004: P.137-148 (EMP)

Utilitarianism and the Greatest Good (137)

Utilitarianism always act so that harm caused is minimized

Described by Hutchinson, Smith, and Hume but popularized by Jeremy Bentham

Bentham argued it should supplant any other moral theories

He felt laws should be evaluated with it (does it net more good than any alternative?)

He was thought to be radical; further this thought by creating a public University of London and having himself entombed there

Felt the concept of rights was illusory

Thought morality should be like a science (logical)

Created a kind of calculus with seven variables to determine which action was best for the whole

Required everyone affected must derive some benefit (prevents the formula from saying slavery was good, etc)

John Stuart Mill Benthams godson; most influential English philosopher in the 19th century; espoused this theory

The next article (by him) defends utilitarian reasoning from arguments from 19th century critics

Argues God is the ultimate utilitarian

Tries to divorce utilitarian reasoning from its simplistic forms, saying actions must also be judged on the quality of their goodness

Addresses a dispute over the Principle of Utility

from Utilitarianism (1861) (John Stuart Mill) (141)

Utilitarianism says actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness

Pleasure must be measured in quality as well as quantity

Most do not wish lower themselves even to be satisfied

It is better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied

The young often have noble intentions which degrade because they are tender capacities

They change to inferior pleasures because they do not have the time or access to better ones

They still prefer the higher road, they just cant take it

Pleasure and pain are heterogeneous and it is hard to decide whether a pleasure outweighs an accompanying pain

Greatest happiness principle an existence exempt from pain and as rich as possible in pleasure; a standard for morality

The Golden Rule has the spirit of utilitarianism

Utilitarian Morality 1) Laws and social arrangements should place happiness of every individual in harmony with the interest of the whole

2) Education and opinion should establish an association between happiness and good for the whole

Motivation does not affect whether something is good or not in utilitarianism morality

The multiplication of happiness is the object of virtue

Some believe utility makes men appear cold and unsympathetic

Not true because utilitarian are aware there are other qualities besides virtue

The best proof of good character is good actions

Utilitarianism is not a godless doctrine if you believe god desires all his creatures to be happy, then god is a utilitarian

Withholding facts can be good (from a malicious person, or from someone deathly ill) can prevent harm

The principle of utility must be good for weighing conflicting utilities and marking the better

Christianity cannot guide utilitarianism because there is not always time to read through Christian texts

Morality has been passed down and is being improved; will never be quite perfect

We require theories to help apply the principle of morality

Wednesday 22 Sept 2004: P.149-153 (EMP)

Utilitarianism (149)

Nonreligious ancestors of 20th century secular humanists optimistic

Utilitarians act not in the name of justice but for the greatest good

Only punish if it serves as a deterrent

The threat of punishment is important; it must be used because of human failing

Consequentialist Principle teleological aspect ( rightness determined by results (ends, not means, count)

Utility Principle hedonic aspect ( pleasure is the only good, pain is the only evil

Hedonic Calculus quantitative score for an experience obtained by summing seven aspects of pleasure/painful experience

Intensity, Duration, Certainty, Nearness, Fruitfulness, Purity, Extent

Simplistic; called pig-philosophy because a happy pig > dissatisfied Socrates

Eudemonistic (Mills ver) defines happiness by types of pleasures (high intel, creativity, spirit; lower eat, drink, sex, rest)

Lower pleasures more intensely gratifying but too much leads to pain

Higher pleasures are superior

Two types of of Utilitarianism (151)

Act-utilitarianism an act is only right if it results in as much good as any other alternative

Rule-utilitarianism act right only if it is required by a rule whose acceptance would lead to > utility for society

Debated whether this is valid because you can always do more good by going beyond the rules

Levels of rules three levels of rules to guide actions

1 (top priority)) remainder rule when no other rule applies, use your best judgment

2) conflict-resolving rules

3) utility-maximizing rules (must always be followed)

Negative responsibility you are responsible for the actions you take and dont take

Hiroshima: The First Use of Nuclear Weapons (1861) (Velasquez, Rostonkowski) (59) (CSME)

David Underhill 27 Sept to 01 Oct 04 (Week 6) P.159-181; Case Study p.3-6 Kant

Kantian Ethics and the Basis of Duty (159) Kant German philosopher; his published works is generally very dense and hard to comprehend

His notes for students and public essays are much easier to grasp

Believed moral and mathematical reasoning were similar

The starry heavens above, the Moral Law within.

We can discover the secrets of nature which allows us to devise rules and most importantly allows us to choose to follow the rules

Explores this in Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals Believed a revolutionary thought was needed to understand our morals from the external world so we could judge them

Believed human reason was not passive but active in developing our understanding of the world

Reason is used to determine how we react to desires, and so is associated with morality

Two desires to fulfill duty or individual desires

Those who fulfill duty are moral

His hometown was completely leveled in WWII and then rebuilt by Soviets and used as their nuclear submarine HQ

Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals (165)

Actions must conform with duty to be considered moral

Even if actions conform with duty, an individual is not necessarily moral depends on their motivation

Only moral if it is done for the sake of duty

An individual must choose to have a duty and then perform it

Formula of Autonomy to be free, an individual must act on their own, not due to incentives

Three forms of the categorical imperative

Formula of Universal Law an individual must act on universal obligations prior to personal desires

Individuals should not exempt themselves from rules which apply to all

Formula of Humanity as an End Itself dont use people for your own ends

Kingdom of Ends act like everyone is a lawgiver and citizen in the moral community

Ex: lying is bad because it prevents other from having all the available information which they can use in order to determine, through Reason, what is right

Must not only not lie, but must tell the truth

You should not hurt a person in a burning car, but you must take action to help them

Inaction can be immoral too

Justifies military intervention for humanitarian reasons

The Reasonable ordering of desire and practical experience in our world results in duty (the laws of morality)

A Simplified Account of Kants Ethics (ONeill) (177)

Author intends to simplify Kant by only presenting the Formula of the End and comparing it to utilitarianism

Each of our acts reflects a maxim (the principle on which one acts)

Whenever we act intentionally, it is due to a maxim we hold

Using someone as a means is an action that they could not consent to in principle

Done through manipulation (not sharing all the facts) or coercion

Kantians compare only the acts which have been proposed dont try to consider every possible act

If an act is required to fulfill duty, it is obligatory

As long as the act is just, it is moral it does not have to be the best act possible

Limits of Kantian Ethics: Intentions and Results

Utilitarianism has an unlimited scope but its precision is limited by how much information is available

Smaller scope only assesses intentional acts and can only apply to individuals as well as groups with policies/rules

Kants ethics also focuses on maxims rather than results

Respect for Life

Kant: people are not ends and so their lives have a high value

This does not mean they will preserve it though Kant acts can be just and reasonable while not providing the best healthcare also, individuals may take pains in order to not use others, making society an unhappy place

Utilitarianism does not value human life specifically; it needs it, but allows for it to be lost for the greater good

Leave No One Behind (Capt Rubel) (3)

CDR Davis is in charge of a helo rescue squadron

A man goes overboard in almost zero visibility, 45kt winds, and 25ft swells

The rescue helo is sent but is taken down

Should CDR Davis send a second helo or cut losses?

David Underhill Week 7 Character and Virtue: Aristotle

Monday and Wednesday: 03 Oct to 05 Oct 04 (Week 7) P.183-200Aristotle and the Ethics of Virtue (183) Kant and Mill were both concerned about understanding the foundations of morality

Aristotle could a theory that could be mechanically applied

Kants demands are so stiff that even he questions if any have lived up to them

Eudaimonia is good for a man translates loosely to happiness or human flourishing ( a life of excellence

Courage is described as the mean between the vices of cowardice (deficiency) and recklessness (excess)

The Moral Virtues (187)

Definition of Human Life

1) Belongs to the rational part of man active (exercising reason) or passive (following reason)

2) Expression in Actions

Excellence 1) produces a good state and 2) enable one to perform ones function well

Virtue in one makes one good and enables him to perform well

Achieved through a mean too much or little destroy perfection

Goodness is characterized by feeling the right amount at the right time on the right occasion with the right motive

Extreme Rules hard to hit the bullseye so

Keep away from the worse extreme one is always more dangerous

Note the errors one is most likely to make

Always guard against pleasure and pleasant things

Habit and Virtue (Aristotle) (193)

Types of Virtue: Virtue of thought or of character

Character and Virtue comes out of habit

Natural conditions cannot be changed by habit (rocks always roll downhill)

Natural capacities are not from habit

Legislators concentrate on habit citizens are made good through habituation

Virtue and vice are from good and bad acts

Right Sort of Habituation

Actions should express correct reason

Habits must avoid excess and deficiency

Pleasure and pain are important to habits

Virtue is concerned with pleasure and pain

Pleasure causes us to act, pain causes us to abstain

Virtues are concerned with feelings and actions and these all imply pleasure or pain

Corrective treatment uses pleasure and pain

The soul is related to what makes it better or worse

3 Objs of choice fine, expedient, pleasant; 3 Objs of avoidance shameful, harmful, painful

A good person is correct

Inquiries must be about pleasure because all feel it from birth and it is important for our actions

It is harder to fight pleasure than emotion

How one can become good without being good already

Conformity vs. Understanding

It is possible to produce something correct randomly so one must learn to understand and then perform well

Crafts vs. Virtues Craft is a product; A craft requires only knowledge

Human must be in the right state to be virtuous 1) must know his act is virtuous; 2) must decide on them for them; 3) must do them from a firm position

Virtue requires habit, not just theory

Courage (Aristotle) (197)

Courage concerned with feelings of fear / confidence (particularly death in battle) (6)

Battle is the greatest and most noble danger

He who is fearless in face of a noble death is brave

Not someone who is confident before being flogged, etc

7 There are fears beyond human strength all fear them

Brave men will be virtuous and face even the things they fear whether they are beyond human str or not

A man who exceeds in fear is a coward

8 Five kinds of courage improperly so called five kinds of courage:

1) Courage of the citizen soldier (true courage); 2) experience with regard to particular facts; 3) Passion; 4) sanguine people (not really brave just confident); 5) people ignorant of danger (only appear brave)

Friday 07 Oct 04 (Week 7, cont.) P.201-207

Friendship (Aristotle) (201) Bk 8, Ch1 two going together are better than one; friendship is noble

Bk 8, Ch2 Motives for love: 1)

Do not love lifeless things because 1) they cannot return affection; 2) we do not wish their good

Some friends are made out of utility not for pleasures sake and dissolves when utility declines/varies

Perfect friendship is the friendship of people who are good and alike in virtue and wish each other well

Lasts as long as their goodness

Naturally permanent

Rare because people like this are rare

Bk 8, Ch4 Friendships between parent/child, etc are unequal and therefore a different kind of friendship

Bk 9, Ch3 It is not unreasonable to break friendships if the friend changes

Do not treat past friends as enemies show some consideration

The Warriors: Reflections on Men in Battle (205) (J. Glenn Gray)

Comrades have lived through hard and dangerous experiences which make them devoted to each other for life

Camaraderie is stronger than friendship and rarely can anything stronger be attained

Essential difference is the suppression of self in comradeship

Friends can endure wars horror without losing zest for life

A lost friends companionship is not replaceable

David Underhill 11 Oct 04 (Week 8) P.195-198 (CSME) Loyalty vs. Mission

EE Cheating Scandal (CBS News) (195) Some mids got the EE test the night before the exam

They spread it to 80% of those taking the test

Afterwards, 24 were eventually expelled for cheating (some not until a year later)

Huge, life-altering changes

no longer in the naval service

honor compromised

much less significant careers on the wholeDavid Underhill NE203 Ethics Notes (2nd Half):_18 Oct 04 - 08 Dec 04 (9th - 16th Weeks)David Underhill 18 to 22 Oct 04 (Week 9) P.209-231 (EMP), 7-12, 57-58 (CSME)

Monday 18 OCT 04 Readings:Natural Law (209) Natural Law there are straightforward moral truths which can be discerned without an affiliation with a faith

Thread of Reason (the Logos) holds Law together

True law is right reason in agreement with nature eternal and unchangeable for all

Inspired part of the US founding documents

Summa Theologica (Aquinas) (213) Natural law is imprinted in all, regardless of beliefs (is eternal)

Human (temporal) law dictate of practical reason

Divine Law needed

1) Since men can have eternal happiness, he must have direction from God to get there

2) Human judgment is uncertain and inconsistent

3) Man cannot make laws which judge internal feelings

4) Human law cannot punish all evil deeds

All acts of virtue are prescribed by natural law

General principles of natural law are the same in all men

The Ethics of Natural Law (Harris) (217) Natural law is not a hard-and-fast guideline

Basic outline is clear, but the closer to moral judgments you come the more prone to error you are

There is an objective truth, but were still working towards it

Human Nature

Useful to describe nature in terms of function

Easy to define a certain social role, but extremely hard to generalize it to all humans

Can also discern behavior (i.e. inclinations) Two kinds:

Biological Values (shared with animals) life and procreation

Characteristically Human Values knowledge, security

Moral Absolutism and the Qualifying Principle

Moral Absolutism one of the most significant aspects of natural law

Ethical standards exist independent of situations and consequences

Cannot trade off or compare ( cannot violate for any reason

Moral judgments must evaluate intent

Qualifying Principles

Principle of Forfeiture person who threatens innocent people forfeits their own life

Principle of Double Effect one may perform an action that has a good and bad effect if:

1) The act, independent of the outcome, is good

2) The outcome is good and bad, and the good cannot be achieved without the bad

3) The bad is not producing the good; the bad is only a side effect

4) Proportional / equal the bad does not outweigh the good

Note: though it brings about an evil, the act is not evil

Wednesday 20 OCT 04 Readings:Natural Law and the Principle of Double Effect: Six Hypothetical Cases (Lucas) (225) Background

Moral analysis typically takes place in thought experiments

Drawbacks: thought experiments can propose examples that are exaggerated, strange, and bizarre

Readers should not be discouraged by this drawback

See it as an attempt to isolate a range of relevant parameters to a specific question can be focused on

A classical example of this method in action

Gyges finds a ring to make him invisible

Glaucon describes the myth

Argues justice is an implicit agreement to limit the sphere of actions we can take

We do whatever we could get away with

We dont do things because we are afraid what would happen if everyone else did the same thing

Believes justice is an outward social convention and that if there were two invisible rings, one belonging to a moral character an another to an immoral character, then no distinction between their behaviors could be made (both would abuse the power)

Natural Law and the Light of Reason

Reason can, independently of religion, evaluate the nature of right and wrong

Each case below is designed to utilitarianism alone is not enough to make a decision

Case I a trolley is coming down the tracks; if it continues, it will kill five construction workers. If you throw a switch, it will go down a different track but will kill a single pedestrian

Case II trolley is going down the tracks and will kill five people unless it is stopped; you can push an overweight man off the bridge (killing him) and stop the trolley

Case III One man is recovering from a stomach ailment. Five others are going to die unless they get organ transplants. The one man, if killed and his organs harvested, can provide the organs the five need in order to live.

Case IV there is a enough medicine to heal five patients with minor (but fatal) disease or one patient with a serious illness; there are six patients (five minor infections, one major infection). Does the doctor save the five or the one?

Real-life case: In WWII, penicillin was in short demand. Five soldiers came back from liberty with socially-communicable diseases. The disease is potentially fatal if untreated, but a little penicillin will save them and return them to the front. Another soldier has been severely wounded by shrapnel at the front and needs all the penicillin to live. If he lives, he will be sent home. Who does the doctor give the medicine to the five or the one?

Case V There is one swimmer swimming in one part of the water and five swimming together in another part. A shark is in the area and is coming to eat all six. You are in a rowboat and can get to and save either the single swimmer or the group of five swimmers. Which group do you save?

Case VI There are five swimmers in the water and a shark is going right to them. You have a large, tasty person in your rowboat and you will not be able to save any of the five swimmers unless you throw the person in the boat overboard (he will be killed and eaten, distracting the shark and giving you time to get the five swimmers out of the water). What do you do?

Friday 22 OCT 04 Readings:Incident at Shkin (Schoultz) (7) I: Predator observed suspicious activity at Shkin (Al-Qaeda, Taliban)

II: US Spec Forces observe a vehicle exit the compound, flash its lights, and return with twelve vehicles

Report this observation to their command

III: B1 Bomber sent to destroy the town

Spec Forces CDR thinks this is rash and calls CENTCOM who cancels it

CENTCOM instructs Spec Forces to search the town

SpecF CDR delays entry into the town for 24 hours to get another team on site and give them some time to prepare

IV: Spec Forces assault the town, secure it, and destroy huge numbers of enemy weapons

Seven POWs taken for questioning (identified by the FBI)

V: The original Spec Forces team remains behind a maintains an observation point close to the town

Farmers see them, approach, and offer food and housing in return for a promise for the men not to bomb their town

VI: US forces are extracted; mission very successful (no key leaders killed, but key intelligence was obtained)

Terror and Retaliation Who is Right? (Rubel) (57) Palestinian man grows up very sheltered

Taught that the Jews are evil and killing them while sacrificing himself while ensure a place in heaven for him

He blows himself up in a caf, killing fourteen men, six women, and four children

An Israeli gunship blows up a building with a bomb-maker inside

The terrorist is killed, but so are fourteen men, six women, and four children (collateral damage: they were having a picnic and the pilot did not see them)

David Underhill 25 Oct to 29 Oct 04 (Week 10) The Ethics of War

Monday: 239-254

The Justification for Going to War (239) Even when civilians control the military they must consult it about war because that is their expertise

Performance is better when one knows what they are going to do, why they are going to do it, and believe in what they are doing

Example: Vietnam showed how a lack of these can destroy the effectiveness of an entire force

Just War Theory the task of authenticating claims that war is a moral necessity in some cases

War and religion conflict

Christianity paints the picture of a non-violent society

Buddhism espouses pacifism

These things make it difficult for believers to reconcile the morality of war

US recognizes these people as conscientious objectors

Is it Always Sinful to Wage War? (Aquinas) (245) Suggests it is usually sinful to wage war (not always)

Limits warmongers from using this as their justification

Necessary Conditions for a war to be just

Must be declared by a legitimate authority

Must be fought for a just cause

Must have the right intention

Other Conditions (by later scholars)

Must be a last resort

Must have a chance of success

Must be proportional to the loss required

Must be pursued through just means

Some believe this to be a separate consideration

Alsace-Lorraine French territory Germans claimed should be German on a basis of language

Argues the people should decide where their taxes and conscripts go (in this case, they were loyal to France)

Once Germany annexes the land, the right of France to take it back diminishes over time because the peoples sentiments change

Though the standard for morals doesnt change, people can change which can affect the morality of an action of a period of time

Legalist Paradigm

Domestic Analogy - states are a part of the international community possess rights like individuals within a society

Someone must be responsible for war no war can be just on both sides

There are wars which are just on neither side

Theory of Aggression

States exist as a part of an international community

This community has law which establish a states rights (political sovereignty, territorial integrity)

The threat of force against a states rights is aggression

Aggression justifies two violent responses wars self-defense and law enforcement

Only aggression justifies war

The aggressor may be punished (like individuals are punished for crime; for deterrence, restraint)

Wednesday: Bushs Speech at West Point Graduation (2002)

The American flag will stand for freedom

Our nations cause has always been larger than our nations defense

We always fight, for a just peace

9/11 cost the terrorists less than a single tank

Even weak states can cripple strong nations with WMD

Deterrence cannot work against shadowy terrorist organizations

Containment is not possible anymore

The war on terror can not be won on the defensive

We will send diplomats where they are needed, and we will send you, our soldiers, where youre needed

Moral clarity was essential to our victory in the Cold War

Moral truth is the same in every culture, in every time, and in every place

From here on, it would be the nation I would be serving, not myself

Friday: 265-274; Bin Laden Letter

Terrorism (Michael Walzer) (265) Randomness is crucial to terrorist activity today death must be chance so that every citizen feels exposed

Terrorism emerged as a revolutionary strategy only after conventional use during WWII (bombing of cities)

Categories of people who are killed

Just terrorists can kill soldiers or immoral political figures (moral political figures are immune)

We judge the assassin by the victor Hitlers assassin would have been praised

Even in destruction, theres a right way and a wrong way and there are limits

Unjust terrorists kill ordinary citizens

The bin Laden Letter US is the friend of Satan

Why are we fighting you?

You attack us

You think Palestine belongs to Jews

Muslim blood spilt in Palestine will be avenged

You steal our wealth and oil

You occupy our countries

We are men of peace just as much as Bush

What do we want?

We are calling you to Islam

Stop your oppression, lies, and immorality

You invent your laws (slap in the face of Allah)

Permit usury, intoxicants, immoral acts, gambling, exploitation of women, trading of sex, destruction of nature by corporations

Discover you are a nation without principles

Stop supporting Israel

Get out of our lands before we send you back in coffins

Dont support corrupt leaders

Interact with us on the basis of mutual interests

David Underhill 01 Nov to 05 Nov 04 (Week 11) Honor on the Battlefield

Monday: 275-292

The Moral Code of the Warrior (275) A priest speaking to students at a Spanish university in the 1500s condemned the Spanish army

Denounced the military for their treatment of the natives

Disagreed with both their legitimacy and especially the way the military handled the natives

Even soldiers in war are constrained by natural law

The Code of the Warrior distinguishes the soldier from the murderer

The theory that war is hell and in hell one can do anything is denounced by most modern cultures (inc. US)

War Crimes: Soldiers and Their Officers (Walzer) (279) The War Convention there are moral constraints on the military during war

All combatants are morally equal

Combatants: forfeit the right not to be target; gain the right to be treated humanely as a POW; gain the responsibility to fight justly and use only the force needed to achieve the mission

In the Heat of Battle (280)

Two soldiers each shoot Germans as they surrendered

Officer tells CO they were in a killing frenzy and it was hard to discern the difference between combat and murder

This is like a plea of temporary insanity

Allowances may be made for certain situations if a group has been attacked by soldiers feigning to surrender before, they may be less sure of when killing is extra

In the Thin Red Line, the men continue to kill after overrunning the Jap position from the rear and the CO says nothing

He should not allow the men to improve themselves at the expense of the enemy

Furthermore, killing is more a sign of hysteria than toughness

Command Responsibility CO must take action to prevent such immoral killings in the future

When combatants are ordered to kill innocents, the liability for their immoral acts is divided up

Combatants responsibility for their actions is diminished

Superior Orders: The My Lai Massacre (282)

Soldiers may not be transformed into mere instruments of war Two defenses argued by those who followed immoral, superior orders Ignorance didnt know what they were doing was wrong (especially true with long-distance weaponry and bombs impossible for a soldier to know if what the commander says is true) Duress stress forced the following of the immoral action (holds true if the harm is not disproportionate) Command Responsibility (286) Military commanders have morally crucial responsibilities: When planning, they must limit civilian casualties to a minimum When organizing forces, they must ensure their men are held to the standard The Case of General Yamashita (288)

US forces disrupted his chain of command His troops committed atrocities during this time (except those with which he could still communicate with) The US executed him for not maintaining control (two Supreme Court justices dissented loudly)

The Nature of Necessity (290)

Killing civilians purposefully is always murder Murder can rarely be done for a good cause (under proportional duress, or some other special condition) The Dishonoring of Arthur Harris (290)

Harris was the commander of the British Bomber Squadron during WWII who led the bombing against German cities and civilians After the war, he was not recognized and those lost under his command were not remembered It was a big slap in the face and showed the British peoples new commitment to just warfareWednesday: 313-318; CSME: 17-24, 45-46

Is the Combatant-Noncombatant Distinction Morally Defensible?: Ethics for Calamities (Reiman) (313) Reasons in Favor of the Combatant-Noncombatant Distinction

Innocent people should not be harmed

Combatants are trained and equipped for war and are prepared to be targeted

Minimizes overall casualties

Creates more promising conditions for peace

Reasons for Doubting the Moral Validity of Combatant-Noncombatant Distinction

Biased in favor of larger powers - larger powers have an air force which can kill indirectly (civilian casualties called collateral damage) while smaller forces attack directly (civilian casualties called murder)

Moral responsibility should be dependent on both consequences and intent

Walzer criticizes the doctrine of double effect for not imposing a duty to minimize harm to civilians

The combatant-noncombatant distinction does not line up with the guilty-innocent distinction

Noncombatants are often the guilty ones (producing war materials, driving capitalism if thats the other sides enemy, etc) and combatants are often innocent

Justifications for Abandoning the Combatant-Noncombatant Distinction

Most people are Kantian, except when it comes to large-scale thinking (then they become utilitarianism) large-scale makes Kant inappropriate

Combatants and noncombatants are both members of the enemy, eroding the distinction between them

Noncombatant civilians have some responsibility for what their gov does

People with special relationships with susceptible people are responsible for their care

As the harmfulness of an action goes up, more sacrifice is expected to prevent it

Principle of calamity ethics citizens have an obligation to stop the gov from committing large-scale harm

Interdiction in Afghanistan (Schoultz) (17) Spec Ops asked if they can do a mission the next morning to stop a convoy of al-Qaeda leaders driving to the Pakistan border

There is little time to prepare but they get ready and go after the targets

Helos and SEAL/Ranger teams engage two vehicles and take them out (filled with terrorists and weapons)

LCDR Reynolds thinks he sees a woman in the car and has his helo gunner hold his fire

Puts the bird at risk (SA-7 could have taken out the entire team and helo)

Lands a few hundred yards in front and stops the vehicle

Turns out he is right

Back at base MAJ Wyatt was upset about the risk

Reynolds claims it was the moral thing to do based on his observations

Wyatt says it was extremely dangerous and a poor decision and says they were very lucky

Incident at Roadblock (ed. Shannon French) (45) Soldiers have to move through a city after parachuting in the night before

All inhabitants had to be off the streets by 8PM

The soldiers setup up barriers and stationed guards with loudspeakers and native speakers at intersections

Tanks are also present to ward off anyone venturing nearby

A bus comes driving at the barrier and refuses to stop despite warnings

The occupants are dressed like the opposition forces and are firing shots

When it comes across the barriers, the soldiers open fire, killing all but the driver

They turn out to be joy riders, not opposition forces

The officer asks the driver why they didnt stop; says they just wanted to see if the soldiers would actually open fire

Friday: 307-312

Winning and Fighting Well (Walzer) (307) Battle of the River Hung

The Duke allowed the other army to completely form up before attacking

His army was weaker and lost

I will not sound my drums to attack an unformed host

Mao Tse-tung said we have no use for his asinine ethics

Argued guerrillas could not take prisoners

Either disperse or execute a tactical decision

If rules can be broken for the sake of cause, then rules have no standing in any war worth fighting

Sliding Scale Argument (309) Sliding Scale (extreme form) soldiers who fight a just war may do anything useful to fighting

General Sherman held this view

Soldiers wont kill civilians for the sake of killing, but will kill them if it advances their mission

Deciding against the sliding scale requires a position of moral absolutism according to many

Requires one to do justice even if the heavens fall

Implausible for most

Another alternative do justice until the heavens are about to fall

Utilitarian extreme restrains military action to usefulness and proportionality

Dealing with the tension between the rules of war and the theory of aggression (310) War convention is set aside in favor of utilitarianism

Convention slowly gives in based on the moral urgency of the cause

Convention is overridden only in the most extreme circumstances

Convention holds and right are respected regardless of consequences

David Underhill 08 Nov to 12 Nov 04 (Week 12) Issues of Modern Warfare

Monday: 255-264

The Reluctant Interventionist (Lucas) (255) April 1997: Sec. State Albright says US will now use force to defend human rights abroad

Jus Ad Intervention when to deploy force for humanitarian ends

1) When a nations conditions or behavior threatens others or

2) When a nation threatens basic human rights

Epistemological - branch of philosophy that studies the nature of knowledge and its foundations, extent, and validity. Epistemological Crisis a traumatic revision of the understandings and knowledge of a society

MacIntyres description is more troubling represents wholesale repudiation of a communitys beliefs

Conflict models must analyze morality

The concept of humanitarian intervention has upset the balance of international relations as people theorize about ways to make intervention a part of those relations

Moral considerations now play an important role in deciding a nations opinion and response to a conflict

Albright has made morality a basis for foreign policy

Realists fear that establishing a procedure for humanitarian intervention will allow strong nations to intervene in their own interests while pretending their intent is to solve a humanitarian issue

Author claims this is cynical because nations currently use national sovereignty as a way to explain their failure to intervene in both places where it is in the nations economic interest and where it is not

Attempts to write human intervention into realist policy have failed

The Intervention Imperative and the Dilemma of the Reluctant Interventionist

Force is certainly permissible when used to defend liberty, justice, and human rights

Sovereignty, anarchy, and self-interest provide an explanation not a justification for force

Intervention Imperative if able, a nation must intervene to prevent injustice

How we carry this out is not specified

Reluctant Interventionist actively seeks to prevent injustice but has trouble deciding which merit intervention

Weinberger doctrine Can you offer reasonable assurance that what you are attempting to do is just?

Intent is to make it hard for authorities to use force to further policy

Albrights doctrine weakens this stance by relaxing constraints and broadening when force is justified

Draft Provisions for Humanitarian and Counter-terrorist interventions

1) Intervention is allowed when a nation greatly violates human rights or threatens other nations

2) Sovereignty is ignored if rights can only be protected through intervention

3) Intervention must be limited to humanitarian concerns or the protection of liberty

4) Military intervention must be a last resort

5) Military force may only be used if likely to succeed

6) Intervention must cause a proportional amount of good to the harm it causes

7) Intervention measures must be moral

Wednesday: 296-306; CSME: 47-56

Perspectives on Intervention: Somalia (Zinni) (299) In Somalia, Bush sent the military in without a clear political objective that was translated into military objectives

The humanitarian effort could be done with the military, but without guidelines it might not be done in the best way

Somalians demanded things that the military wasnt prepared to offer (jobs programs, etc)

The American General set up a police force, prison system, and court system

They worked well but were not part of a specific plan

The UN came in and completely changed the approach to fixing the country, excluding many who would have been involved in the US effort

We have to decide what exactly our militarys role will be

The military has to pay for these missions regardless this detracts from its ability to fight conventional war

Political motivation to get as many countries involved as possible is also a burden on the military

Many other countries do not have the logistics or training to support themselves in situations like Somalia which requires the US baby-sit and spend their own resources propping up other countries forces

To handle a situation like Somalia, a distinct policy needs to be passed down

America is the strongest and most economically great nation in the world and is a nation of haves

We [must] make some hard decisions about the moral obligation we have for the rest of the world

Case Studies in Humanitarian Military Intervention (47)

Rwanda (1994)

Was a Belgian colony until after some time after WWII

The Belgians favored the educated minority ethnic Tutsis and when they pulled out a huge tension existed between them and the majority

This tension began to unravel when the government by the majority was attacked by the Tutsis

When the leaders of both sides die in an airplane when it is shot down, Rwandas leader assassinate moderates and order the killing of all Tutsis

Many run around with machetes, clubs with nails, and anything remotely deadly and begin hacking Tutsis to bits

The UN peacekeeping force (Belgian and Canadian, mostly) is overwhelmed and withdraw

A captain with less than a hundred men is protecting over 2,000 Tutsis when he is ordered to withdraw

His is torn, but follows the order the Tutsis beg for him to kill all of them rather than leave them there

After he leaves, they are all hacked to death

The Canadian general in charge suffers serious mental problems as a result later

Srebrenica (1995)

Srebrenica was a mostly Muslim city in Yugoslavia

Ethnic Serbs began an ethnic cleansing campaign

Dutch peacekeepers sent in to relieve weary, undermanned Canadians but are very poorly supplied

The Dutch become demoralized and communicate that they cannot protect their objectives

The Serbs capture 30 Dutch soldiers and threaten execution if they are bombed by air

The Serbs attack and air support is very lacking when the threat is reiterated

The Dutch are overwhelmed and evacuate, leaving the city to the Serbs who execute 7,000 Muslims

Friday: Code of the Warrior; Five Moral Dilemmas of Modern Warfare

Code of the Warrior (French) A warriors code defines limits on what warriors can do and not do

Warriors of today often find themselves fighting enemies who fight without rules

The degree of separation between warriors and murderers is very small

Its easy to rationalize murder if one believes their cause to be noble terrorists do not see themselves as murderers

No matter how one justifies their actions, one must follow the rules of war or forfeit their right to be regarded as warriors

Are the rules of war absolute or changing? Were American guerillas in the Revolutionary War murderers?

Rules governing when an how one kills distinguishes warriors from murderers

Terrorists believe the pricks of conscience they feel are their weakness trying to steer them away from their sacred duty

The ugliness of war against an enemy considered to be subhuman can hardly be exaggerated

Psychological damage is often the result of violating what is right

Technology cheats people from the chance to absorb and reckon with the enormity of what they have done

Warriors must respect opponents

Everyone who cares about the welfare of warriors wants them to have lives worth living after the fighting is done

The warriors code guards their humanity

Five Moral Dilemmas of Modern Warfare

The distances at which lethal force can be applied is growing

Difficult for those who press the buttons to understand death is occurring

Makes one observant, careful, accurate

In virtual war, death is far, far away

A warrior must keep a sharp focus on death and those you are killing to maintain honor

Technology can make you morally numb which isnt going to make you do your job with the discrimination, care, and sense of responsibility you need

The temptation to vengefully, indiscriminately use force is great when the other side does not play by the rules

The enemy may exploit a warriors observance of the rules

If we violate the rules, the consequences can be extremely costly

Military is also a diplomat of American values

Recently, military action has been subjected to legal review

This does not necessarily provide moral coverage

Ethical life is to important to leave to someone else; moral abdication should not be an option for a military member

Moral behavior is always individual behaviorDavid Underhill 15 Nov to 19 Nov 04 (Week 13) Liberty and Rights

Monday: 323-344

Rights and Liberty (Lucas) (323) Military life is structured and restrictions are imposed on some liberties that civilians normally enjoy

Modern ethical thought marked by individual human rights

Liberty political guarantees respecting the freedom of individuals

Basic or natural rights are self-evident and unalienable (Jefferson)

What are these rights and negative liberties?

Negative liberties non-interference for the state

Still open to debate

Whether or not political liberty is self-evident and inalienable

Should any other human rights should be observed

On Liberty (Mill) (327)

Chapter 1: Introduction

Power can only be rightly used in order to prevent harm

Over himself, the individual is sovereign

Utility is the ultimate appeal of all ethical questions

Human liberty

Absolute freedom of opinion

Freedom to express opinions (almost inseparable from the first)

Freedom to pursue anything as long as it does not harm others

Freedom to unite as long as others arent harmed or deceived

Chapter 2: Of the Liberty of Thought and Discussion

Nobody should ever be silenced not even one dissident in a sea of people who agree

To learn a subject as well as possible, one must study it from all perspectives

Freedom of opinion and its expression are required to the mental well-being of man for four reasons:

1) An opinion should not be silenced because it may be correct

2) Though an opinion may be in error, it is probably partially correct

3) Unless the truth is contested, it will not be fully believed

4) Without other opinions, the truth may be lost

Chapter 3: Of Individuality as One of the elements of Well-Being

Actions cannot be as free as opinions

Acts which unjustifiably harm others should be controlled

Liberty of individuals must be limited so one does not harm others

Traditions is evidence of what experience has taught one

1) However, ones experiences may be too narrow or misinterpreted

2) Also, ones interpretation may be correct but unsuitable

3) Conforming to custom does not develop one

Mental and moral powers are improved through use

Each persons own mode of existence is the best for him

Chapter 4: Of the Limits to the Authority of Society Over the Individual

Everyone who receives societies protections owes society something in return

Everyone is bound to observe a certain line of conduct

1) May not harm others

2) Must bear their share of the labors

Society must enforce that each person bears their share

If a person affects other, society has jurisdiction over their actions

No person entirely isolated

Should laws govern mature individuals as well and protect them from drinking, drugs, etc?

Acts harmful to oneself affect society too

Whenever there is a definite damage or risk of damage, the case may be governed

Chapter 5: Applications

Trade is a social act cheapness and quality are best obtained by allowing free trade (buyers must still have choice)

Liberty to sell dangerous items can be restricted in order to prevent harm

A public authority should interfere to prevent crimes and accidents

Acts which are harmful to oneself may be stopped if done in public (affecting others)

Taxation of stimulants up to where they peak is approved

A person cannot give up their freedom

Reflections on the Revolution in France (Burke) (339)

Government and liberty are both good (abstract)

Flattery corrupts both the receiver and giver

Do not congratulate too soon

The Revolution was to preserve our liberties

A constitution allow us to transfer government and policy to future generations

There may be situations in which democracy is needed, but not yet by great nations like France

Aristotle said democracy looks strikingly like tyranny

People prefer liberty in virtuous poverty to a wealthy servitude

Liberty without wisdom and virtue is the greatest of all evils

Do not mirror the British constitution in France

Wednesday: 351-362

Paternalism (Dworkin) (351) I: Paternalism interference with a persons liberty for their own good

II: Paternalistic Laws

Breaking inflicts criminal penalties laws against dueling, laws which set maximum interest rate for loans, etc

Law which make it difficult to do something not allowing one to defend a murder charge by saying it was done with the victims consent

III: The class of the person affected is not always the person whose liberty is restricted

Ex: Professionals have to be licensed (protects patients)

Pure Paternalism those whose freedoms are restricted are also benefited

Impure Paternalism a groups freedoms are restricted in order to help another

IV: Legislation which regulates how many hours a worker can work a week is not paternalistic

The law is not overriding the workers judgment, but giving effect to their judgment because they couldnt do it alone but only as a group

V: Mills objections to paternalism

1) Restraint is evil so those who restrain are burdened with proof

2) Since conduct affects oneself, one cannot fall back to the interests of the whole

3) One must consider the individuals own good

4) One cannot advance individual interests through compulsion

5) Therefore, one cannot use compulsion to push ones own interests

VI: Children may be interfered with because they have not fully developed their minds; hard to defer gratification

Paternalistic laws must clearly show the harm they are preventing by restraining liberties; must show they are proportional

Friday: 345-350

Human Rights (Nickel) People have rights which prevent gov from taking certain actions against them

Parts to an appeal Rightholders and Addressees; appeal says what the rightholder is entitled to

Universal human rights have become common in the past 50 years

Violations still occur many nations still grant few rights to citizens

The Declaration of Independence was bold rebelled against the king and was the first document to assert that all people had certain inalienable rights

Inalienable cannot be bargained or taken away

Types of Rights

Liberty rights freedom of

Political rights right to vote, run for office, campaign

Equality rights freedom from slavery, right to protection by laws

Due process rights speedy and public trials with counsel if needed

Magna Carta was the first document to say human rights were an important consideration

United Nations designed to formulate international law

Universal Declaration of Human Rights intl. bill of rights (no force of law, but set a standard for later legal docs)

UN open to all peace-loving states who promise to support the UN

Has helped human rights be recognized in most of the worldDavid Underhill 22 Nov to 24 Nov 04 (Week 14) Truthtelling

Monday: 395-409

Upholding the Truth (Lucas) (395) War requires secrecy and utilizes deception

Honesty is the best policy in most situations, however

Trust is essential for organizational effectiveness

The military does not allow officers to lie

Western culture believes lying to be the worst of all immoral acts

Dante (The Inferno) put liars in the deepest layer of Hell

Individuals lie because of: performance, protection from punishment, others doing it, etc

When is the Whole Truth Attainable? (Bok) (397)

Focus is on whether or not you intend to mislead

Lie intentionally deceptive message

Grotius argued that lying to thieves, etc. was justifiable

Mental Reservation if you say something misleading but qualify it in your mind to make it true

When a law is too strict to live by, people find loopholes

Public authorities still swear not to hold mental reservations

Truthfulness is essential to society

Deception is coercive and gives the liar power (until one is caught)

Liars do not like to be lied to

Liars use caution around those who they have lied to

Few lies are solitary

As you lie, it becomes lies psychologically distressing and they seem more necessary and less evil

Trust is the foundation of relationships among people

Aquinas defined three kinds of lies

Helpful lies, Jocose lies (jestful), and malicious lies

Only malicious lies are mortal sins (the others are much less serious)

Religious Absolutist Perspective Death kills the body, but a lie loses eternal life for the soul. To lie to save the life of another, then, is a foolish bargain.

Two beliefs which support this:

1) God does not allow any lies

2) God will punish all who lie

Utilitarians did not accept the absolutist perspective

Stress the differences in severity between lies

White Lies a lie not meant to do harm (little moral importance)

Upsetting news is usually sugar-coated, etc.

Discretion must limit what is said

Excuses moral reasons people use to persuade themselves that lying is acceptable

Four most common reasons used to defend lying: avoid harm, get benefits, fairness, truth

Moral justification must be made public

Test of publicity asks which lies would be regarded as justifiable by other reasonable people

Look at the lie from the perspective of all who it affects

Levels of publicity

1) Look at the lie from the perspective of all who it affects (soul-searching)

2) Present the case to peers

3) (for more serious cases) Allow any to review the case none may be excluded

Nature of publicity: 1) The public we consult should be greater than just ourselves; 2) No one may be excluded

Limitations it is just a check

What must be done to justify

1) Look for alternatives to lying

2) Compare moral reasons for and against lying

Remember that lying and force are similar

Also, remember that lying can spread quickly

Most lies are unjustifiable

Wednesday: CSME: 81-82, 109-114

Major Knight and Cambodia (Wrage) (81) Knight directs B-52s to their bombing targets

One day he gets coordinates from an envelope from a special plane

The coordinates are inside Cambodia and he is to destroy all evidence that the planes bombed in Cambodia and pretend they hit normal targets within Vietnam

Falsification of MV-22 Readiness Reports (Slyman) (109)

A squadron of MV-22s is having very poor readiness the aircraft are breaking quite a bit

The CO gets heat and has his job threatened for not having a higher readiness rate

The CO compels his officers and men to fudge the numbers and go around the system in order to trick the system and be able to report 100% readiness

This came to the attention of an officer outside the squadron who tried to get the COs boss to put an end to the dishonest practices

The squadron was reviewed by criminal investigators and charges were pressed against the marines who were guilty

David Underhill 29 Nov to 03 Dec 04 (Week 15) Justice

Monday: 363-384

The Idea of Justice (Lucas) (363) Aristotle: Justice is a matter of treating equals with equality

Two distinct concepts (Aristotle)

1) Distributive Justice Appropriate distribution of societys benefits and burdens

2) Retributive Justice Equal administration of the law

Glaucon said justice was societys elite using their power to control society (still believed by moral realists)

We can object to the justice administered by stratified ancient societies because the criteria that determines how the benefits and burdens were split up were irrelevant in determining what a person deserved

Leaders who are appear inconsistent or like they play favorites causes discontent within a unit important to military leaders

Justice as Fairness (Rawls) (369)

Problems of justice liberty, equality, and social differences in society

There are many overly simple formulas: Egalitarianism (equal share) and systems based on effort, merit (meritocracy), ability and need (communism), and equal opportunity and success (laissez-faire capitalism)

Difficult to generalize these theories which work beyond a legal system

Often cause discontent and feelings that society is unjust

The form of capitalism above is not the form the US uses; businesses have some restraints in the US

Above form subject to corruption by special interests

Why is someone praised highly on the basis of exercising talents endowed at birth

Frustrates those who working harder but have less natural ability

Third part of Kants Categorical Imperative problem: lawmakers biased to the needs of themselves and their communities

Original Position an ideal moral kingdom in which each lawmaker has no knowledge about his community or own situation

Would lead to a society that was fair

A powerful thought experiment which can be used to evaluate our laws

Promotes two principles: liberty and equality

Equality has two parts: public office is open to all and those best endowed and lucky will win leading to differences in social and economic status; not unjust because this inequality could be shown to work to the benefit of even the least advantaged

Reflective Equilibrium

Those in the original position

Not all inequalities are unjust (like social and economic status; see above)

Difference Principle discrimination on the basis of race (etc) is unjust because the office is not open to all and the least advantaged is not benefited

Wednesday: 385-394

Crime and Punishment (Duff) (385)1: Punishment, the State and the Criminal Law

Punishment burden placed on an offender by an authority

Not all breaches require punishment

Types of Punishment

Censure express disapproval

Hard Treatment loss of liberties, money, etc. (criminal punishments)

2: Consequentialism and Retributivism

Consequentialism justify punishment because it helps out the whole (crime-prevention)

Justified if benefits outweigh costs

Prevention through deterrence, incapacitation, and reform

Objections

Does not respect people as responsible

Treats all [citizens] like dogs because it coerces people

Retributivism only the guilty should be punished and only in proportion to their crime

Negative interpretation the innocent may not be punished and the guilty may not be excessively punished

Requires punishment to be deserved and beneficial

Positive interpretation the guilty must be punished as they deserve

Should be punished so they feel guilt; does not matter if the punishment achieves good outcomes

Criminals gain an unfair advantage so punishment takes this advantage away

Objection: distorts crime (Ex: a rapist is not really taking advantage of those who obey the laws)

3: Punishment and Communication

People are imperf


Recommended