Responsibility, Risk, and Killing in Self‐Defense*
Responsibility, Risk, and Killing in Self‐Defense*
复制标题
自卫中的责任、风险和杀戮*
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2009
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Seth Lazar
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Seth Lazar
战争中的战斗人员造成了难以形容的破坏。他们破坏环境，破坏文化遗产，伤害，致残和杀害。最重要的是，他们杀人。这些行为通常在道德上是令人憎恶的。出于正义，人们有义务尊重他人的生命权。除了战争，在几乎任何其他情况下杀人都是违反这一义务的。如果一个国家处于战争状态，一个关心的公民正在决定是否参战，首先必须证明杀戮是正当的。有两种方法可以为那些通常会违反我们正义义务的行为辩护。第一种是主张在相关情形下，该义务事实上并不存在，因此不存在相应的违约。第二种观点认为，虽然这些行为确实是不公正的，但还有其他一些更令人信服的道德考虑，可以证明这些违反义务的行为是正当的。例如，可能无法避免
Combatants in war inflict untold devastation. They lay waste to the environment, destroy cultural heritage, wound, maim, and kill. Most importantly, they kill. These are deeds that would normally be morally abhorrent. People have, as a matter of justice, a duty to respect others’ rights to life. To kill, in almost any other context besides war, is to breach that duty. If a country is at war, and a concerned citizen is deciding whether or not to fight, it is killing that must first be justified. There are two ways to justify acts that would, ordinarily, breach our duties of justice. The first is to maintain that in the relevant situation the duty does not in fact obtain, so there is no corresponding breach. The second is to argue that, while these acts are indeed unjust, there is some other, more compelling moral consideration, which justifies these breaches of duty. For example, it may be impossible to avoid