The Ethics of the Alternatives to War

战争替代方案的伦理

• 批准号: AH/L003783/1
• 负责人: James Pattison
• 金额: $ 18.52万
• 依托单位: University of Manchester
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Fellowship
• 财政年份: 2014
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2014 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=AH%2FL003783%2F1
• 关键词: Ethics; Alternatives; War

It is widely held that war should be eschewed and nonviolent alternatives should be pursued instead. For instance, various pacifist approaches reject the moral permissibility of war and Just War Theorists assert that, if war is to be morally justified, reasonable alternatives to war need to be pursued (the principle of last resort) and war must do more good than harm compared to the alternatives (the principle of proportionality). However, there tends to be a lack of systematic ethical analysis of the issues surrounding each of the alternatives, as well as the alternatives as whole. Although there has been significant empirical analysis of some of the potential alternatives, these have not considered in detail the relevant moral issues. Accordingly, the Fellowship will be used to develop a research project on the ethical issues surrounding the alternatives to war. It will focus specifically on economic sanctions, diplomacy, peace operations, nonviolent resistance, disarmament, and arming rebels. It will ultimately lead to a book (provisionally entitled 'Just and Unjust Alternatives to War') and two journal articles, as well as a research network. It will develop a normative framework on the alternatives the war and two central themes: first, the reasons to pursue the alternatives to war are generally much weightier than the reasons to pursue war because, for instance, of duties to contribute to peaceful international norms; second, wars may nevertheless be permissible sometimes because the alternatives face notable, additional problems of their own. My work during the Fellowship will answer the following questions: - What are the particular ethical issues surrounding each of the alternatives? - Does an analysis of the alternatives to war strengthen the case for 'revisionist' Just War Theory (which focuses more on individual culpability or responsibility for posing an unjust threat in war), 'collectivist' Just War Theory (which focuses more on states, collectives, and the conventional rules of war), or pacifism? - How should the Just War requirements of last resort and proportionality be understood? - What institutional reforms are necessary to be able to pursue the alternatives in the most morally justifiable manner? The Fellowship generally will be very important for my developing my leadership skills. It will strengthen my experience of knowledge exchange and public engagement, with the aim of developing the skills necessary to achieve substantial and clear impacts on policy, and will lead to the development of a new network on the alternatives to war.

人们普遍认为，应该避免战争，而应该追求非暴力的替代方案。例如，各种和平主义的方法拒绝战争的道德允许性和正义战争理论家断言，如果战争是道德上合理的，合理的替代战争需要追求（最后手段的原则）和战争必须做更多的好处比伤害相比的替代品（比例原则）。然而，往往缺乏对围绕每一种替代方案以及整个替代方案的问题进行系统的伦理分析。虽然对一些可能的替代方案进行了大量的经验分析，但这些分析没有详细考虑相关的道德问题。因此，该研究金将用于制定一个研究项目，研究围绕战争替代办法的伦理问题。它将特别关注经济制裁、外交、和平行动、非暴力抵抗、解除武装和武装叛乱分子。它最终将导致一本书（暂名为“战争的公正和不公正的替代方案”）和两篇期刊文章，以及一个研究网络。它将制定一个关于战争替代办法的规范性框架和两个中心主题：第一，寻求战争替代办法的理由通常比寻求战争的理由重要得多，例如，因为有责任为和平的国际规范作出贡献;第二，战争有时可能是允许的，因为替代办法本身面临着明显的额外问题。我在奖学金期间的工作将回答以下问题：-围绕每种选择的特定伦理问题是什么？- 对战争替代方案的分析是否加强了“修正主义”正义战争理论（它更关注个人在战争中造成不公正威胁的罪责或责任），“集体主义”正义战争理论（它更关注国家，集体和战争的传统规则）或和平主义的理由？- 如何理解正义战争的最后手段和相称性要求？- 什么样的制度改革是必要的，以便能够以道德上最合理的方式追求替代方案？奖学金通常对我发展我的领导能力非常重要。它将加强我在知识交流和公众参与方面的经验，目的是发展必要的技能，对政策产生重大和明确的影响，并将导致建立一个关于战争替代办法的新网络。

项目成果

THE MORALITY OF SANCTIONS

制裁的道德性

• DOI: 10.1017/s0265052515000138
• 发表时间: 2015
• 期刊: Social Philosophy and Policy
• 影响因子: 0.4
• 作者: Pattison J

The Ethics of Arming Rebels

武装叛军的道德观

• DOI: 10.1017/s089267941500043x
• 发表时间: 2015
• 期刊: Ethics & International Affairs
• 影响因子: 1.3
• 作者: Pattison J

The Case for the Nonideal Morality of War: Beyond Revisionism versus Traditionalism in Just War Theory

战争非理想道德的案例：正义战争理论中超越修正主义与传统主义

• DOI: 10.1177/0090591716669394
• 发表时间: 2016
• 期刊: Political Theory
• 影响因子: 1.4
• 作者: Pattison J

The ethics of diplomatic criticism: The Responsibility to Protect, Just War Theory and Presumptive Last Resort.

• DOI: 10.1177/1354066115572491
• 发表时间: 2015-12
• 期刊: European journal of international relations
• 影响因子: 3.4
• 作者: Pattison J

Mapping the Responsibilities to Protect: A Typology of International Duties

绘制保护责任：国际义务的类型学

• DOI: 10.1163/1875984x-00702006
• 发表时间: 2015
• 期刊: Global Responsibility to Protect
• 影响因子: 0.9
• 作者: Pattison J