Supreme Emergencies Revisited

Statman, Daniel

doi:10.1086/508037

Cited by 29 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Short of supreme emergencies, that is, genocidal threats, no one argues it is permissible to attack civilian targets intentionally (Statman 2006). Whether these emergencies allow one to throw off the constraints of international humanitarian law remains a difficult question.…”

Section: Unnecessary and Excessive Casualtiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Second Lebanon War: The Question of Proportionality and the Prospect of Non-Lethal Warfare

Gross

2008

Journal of Military Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Unnecessary and Excessive Casualtiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Second Lebanon War: The Question of Proportionality and the Prospect of Non-Lethal Warfare

Gross

2008

Journal of Military Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In a recent paper, Daniel Statman (2006a) notes three features of situations where the supreme emergency argument has been thought to apply: First, supreme emergencies are formulated in terms of a particular community. For a supreme emergency to be present, the threat has to be directed against a community rather than, say, merely against a large number of non-related individuals.…”

Section: Just War Theory Supreme Emergency and Non-antagonistic Thrmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2 Comments and criticism abound. For good examples, seeBellamy (2004),Toner (2005) andStatman (2006a).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Supreme Emergencies Without the Bad Guys

Sandin

2008

Philosophia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses the application of the supreme emergency doctrine from just-war theory to non-antagonistic threats. Two versions of the doctrine are considered: Michael Walzer's communitarian version and Brian Orend's prudential one. I investigate first whether the doctrines are applicable to non-antagonistic threats, and second whether they are defensible. I argue that a version of Walzer's doctrine seems to be applicable to non-antagonistic threats, but that it is very doubtful whether the doctrine is defensible. I also argue that Orend's version of the doctrine is applicable to non-antagonistic threats, but that his account is not defensible, regardless of whether the threats are antagonistic or not.

show abstract

“…In another paper, I discuss at length possible justifications for such permissions, and show how problematic they are. 3 I argue there that the best route to take in order to establish a moral justification for Special Permissions is based on a collectivist ethics, but that this ethics has serious flaws that make it quite unattractive. It is, thus, not surprising to find philosophers trying an altogether different route, namely, an attempt to justify the use of Special Permissions without presuming to show that such use is in itself morally justified.…”

Section: The Tragedy Of Supreme Emergenciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moral Tragedies, Supreme Emergencies and National-Defence

Statman¹

2006

J Appl Philos

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

 Assume that some group, A, is under a serious threat from some other group, B. The only way group A can defend itself is by using lethal force against group B, but the standard conditions for using force in self-defence are not met. Ought group A to avoid the use of force even if this means yielding to an aggressive, evil power? Most people would resist this conclusion, yet given the violation of essential conditions for self-defence, this resistance is hard to justify. The aim of this paper is to point to an interesting yet unnoticed move made by some philosophers to find a way out of this problem, a move which relies on construing the situation at hand as a tragic dilemma. I show the attractiveness of this solution and argue that in the end it fails. Daniel Statman

show abstract

Supreme Emergencies Revisited

Cited by 29 publications

References 14 publications

The Second Lebanon War: The Question of Proportionality and the Prospect of Non-Lethal Warfare

The Second Lebanon War: The Question of Proportionality and the Prospect of Non-Lethal Warfare

Supreme Emergencies Without the Bad Guys

Moral Tragedies, Supreme Emergencies and National-Defence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About