Historiography of Just War Theory

Reichberg, Gregory M.

doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199943418.013.18

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, St Thomas Aquinas, the key figure in the systematisation of classical just war thinking, came to his conclusions about whether any war could be just through dialectically linking his own position to the particular opinions of his predecessors. As Reichberg (2018) notes, thinkers like Aquinas started with historical thinking about the ethics of war before analysing particular issues for their own sake:The classical theorists of just war understood that our reasoning about the rights and wrongs of war would only be as good as the premises that form our point of departure. On their view, theoretical reflection would be strengthened through the examination of positions articulated by earlier thinkers.…”

Section: The Historical Approach As ‘Third-way’mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is quite indicative, then, that, as Reichberg (2018: 64) notes, classical just war thinkers did not consider themselves theorists. Even Grotius, the first thinker to actually do so, differed markedly from the attitude of today’s analytical thinkers:Yet, unlike Descartes, who several years later would seek to construct a new science of ‘first philosophy’ from scratch, Grotius was at pains to demonstrate that his juridical science of war and peace was not a construct born of his own mind, but rather a discipline that emanated from a set of pregiven norms ( jus naturae – natural right) that had already been acknowledged by a broad array of Greek, Roman, and Christian thinkers.…”

Section: The Historical Approach As ‘Third-way’mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Upholding that paradigm, as we saw above, without revisions in his argument for a moral equality of combatants, he seems to equate legality and morality. As Reichberg (2018: 71–74) demonstrates, Walzer’s claim that the moral equality thesis is part of the classical just war is thus mistaken. There was, in fact, a group of medieval thinkers, the so-called camp of ‘regular war’, which argued for a logical separation between jus ad bellum and jus in bello .…”

Section: The Historical Approach and The Symmetry Thesismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The historical approach and the ‘war of ethics within the ethics of war’

Braun

2018

Journal of International Political Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Historical Approach and the 'War of Ethics within the Ethics of War' Christian Nikolaus Braun Contemporary just war thinking has mostly been split into two competing camps, namely Michael Walzer's approach and its revisionist critics. While Walzerians employ a casuistical method, most revisionists resort to analytical philosophy's reflective equilibrium. Importantly, besides employing different methods the two sides also disagree on substantive issues. This article focuses on one such issue, the moral equality of combatants, arguing that while a methodological reconciliation between the two camps is impossible contemporary debate would benefit from a 'third-way' approach. Presenting James Turner Johnson's historical method as such an approach the article suggests that while revisionists are correct in considering the symmetry thesis as ethically indefensible, in order to arrive at this judgement, it is not necessary to employ far-fetched thought experiments and the use of historical cases is preferable. The root cause of Walzer's problematic reasoning vis-à-vis the symmetry thesis, the historical approach reveals, is his uneasy relationship with the just war tradition. Contributing to a deeper understanding of the respective approaches' differences the article seeks to move the focus of contemporary just war away from a narrow intra-disciplinary divide and toward an engagement with substantive questions.

show abstract

Section: The Historical Approach As ‘Third-way’mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Historical Approach As ‘Third-way’mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Historical Approach and The Symmetry Thesismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The historical approach and the ‘war of ethics within the ethics of war’

Braun

2018

Journal of International Political Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Coste correctly associates this idea with eighteenth–nineteenth century public international law, which was an extension of the regular war paradigm that had earlier been advanced by Fulgosius and other medieval civil lawyers. On the conflation of just war with the regular‐war outlook of Fulgosius et al, see Reichberg .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reframing the Catholic Understanding of Just War: Two Contrasting Approaches in the Interwar Period

Reichberg¹

2018

Journal of Religious Ethics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the inter war period, European Catholic authors exhibited two different approaches to the question of just war. One approach was articulated at the “Fribourg Conventus,” a 1931 meeting of French, Swiss, and German theologians, whose subsequent declaration (Conventus de bello, published in 1932) called for a reformulation of Catholic teaching based on the premise that the traditional just‐war doctrine had been superseded by developments in international law. A competing approach was articulated by the Dutch Jesuit Robert Regout, who maintained that the just‐war doctrine could contribute to the formation of international law by providing a much‐needed normative foundation for the use of armed force by individual states in redress of their violated rights. After presenting these two approaches and explaining how they differ, this essay shows how the outlook of the Conventus de bello is reflected in subsequent papal statements on armed force—to the detriment of the traditional terminology of just war.

show abstract

Francisco de Vitoria and Francisco Suárez on Religious Authority and Cause for Justified War: The Centrality of Religious War in the Christian Just War Tradition

Endy¹

2018

Journal of Religious Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contrary to the received understanding that Francisco de Vitoria and Francisco Suárez ruled out religious war by grounding just cause in natural law, they supported a robust view of papal authority for war when necessary for the defense of the church against heretics, schismatics, and pagans as well as for the spread of Christianity and Christendom throughout the world. They believed that religious wars were in accord with natural law as a means to its fulfillment in Christianity, as a justification for the defense of the church as the one true faith, and as a moral obligation to provide all of humanity with the opportunity to receive Christian truth and grace. The neo‐Thomists' vigorous support for religious war was in the mainstream of the Christian just war tradition from the time of the wars against pagans in the early middle ages through their own time. This finding and the continuation into the modern era of sanctified patriotism stemming from the mixing of church and state especially during war that began in early Middle Ages, along with the historic roots of the recently prominent presumption against war, argue for a more complex understanding of the normative Christian just war tradition than that found among supporters of the classic interpretation of that tradition.

show abstract

Historiography of Just War Theory

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

The historical approach and the ‘war of ethics within the ethics of war’

The historical approach and the ‘war of ethics within the ethics of war’

Reframing the Catholic Understanding of Just War: Two Contrasting Approaches in the Interwar Period

Francisco de Vitoria and Francisco Suárez on Religious Authority and Cause for Justified War: The Centrality of Religious War in the Christian Just War Tradition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About