Ethics

Ethics Study Guide Jus Ad Bellum refers to what Medieval scholars believed. They said a war could not be entered without certain aspects of the purpose and outcome being met. The doctrine of jus ad bellum determines when it is moral to enter a war. The doctrine of jus in bellum dictates how a war should be conducted during the course of the conflict. When determining to enter a war, the following guidelines exist: the authority waging the war must be legitimate; all heads of state must be notified of the rules; the war must have just cause, yet be the last resort; peace must be the ultimate goal with success being probable; and the intent for starting the war must not be one of hatred or vengefulness. Kant, Immanuel (1724-1804 C.E.) paved a new way for the thought processes of ethics. He did not take the standard role many before him did; instead, he chose to question, as did Socrates, the wrongness of human acts. Humans are able to choose and judge what actions they take for rightness. When one chooses to commit a wrongful act, that person will not be looked upon favorably. In one of Kant’s writings, he describes and distinguishes between what is good, and what is not good, and the factors that determine this. He believed good will is the only good that is without qualification in existence, while explaining how something can only be good if it is compatible with good itself. Kant helped to relate this in regards to one performing a duty out of duty or just doing it for no other purpose. This, in turn, is what makes a good person good. In addition, it is the presence of self- governing reason—autonomy—in each person that Kant thought offered decisive grounds for viewing each individual as possessed of equal worth and deserving of equal respect. Kantianism is a deontological, act-based, human valuing philosophy. Kant believed people were inherently bad and that we needed to use our reason to come up with a moral framework to transcend mortal life and ultimately gain entrance to heaven. To do this, people have to live by acts that are as selfless as possible. Kant’s Categorical Imperatives are maxim-based obligations for moral reasoning and behavior. King Jr., Martin Luther (1929-1968 C.E.) built on the themes that have been with us since Epictetus. From the Stoics, there is disdain for the punishments, including fetters and prisons, that the unjust world visits upon the just man in the attempt to silence him. From Thomas Aquinas, citing Augustine (as does King), there is the certainty that the unjust law is no law at all, and should in no way be obeyed. From Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Thomas Jefferson, the willingness not only to assert constitutional rights, but to insist that they be incorporated into the law of the land, in this case, all the lands of the United States. We may add, from Jefferson, the acceptance of a certain quota of violence as the cost of liberty; from Kant, the centrality of the notion of human dignity; from Josiah Royce, the fierce devotion to that cause which fulfilled and consumed his life; and from Rawls, his contemporary, the recognition that peace and plenty are worthless without justice. Legal Paternalism involves the state acting like a parent and forcing the citizens to behave in their own best interests by restricting liberty. ©2018 Achieve Page 110 of 116