Commonsense Morality and the Ethics of Killing in War: An Experimental Survey of the Israeli Population
Forthcoming Law and Ethics of Human Rights
45 Pages Posted: 30 Jun 2012 Last revised: 4 Dec 2015
Date Written: March 05, 2014
The morality of killing in war, which has been the subject of debate among philosophers and legal scholars, focuses on two main approaches: the “traditional” and the “revisionist.” The traditional approach argues for symmetry: soldiers of both sides are liable to be killed, whether or not the war they fight is just; civilians are immune from being harmed whether or not they are responsible for the evil against which the just side fights. Recently this approach has been challenged by a revisionist viewpoint, which derives the morality of killing in war from facts concerning the responsibility of individuals for wrongful threats. Killing soldiers who fight a just war is morally impermissible, whereas in certain cases killing civilians who are involved in an unjust aggression is permissible. The present study uses an experimental survey to examine whether moral attitudes toward targeting individuals in war are shaped by the factors underlying this debate: the cause of the war, the status of the targeted individuals as soldiers or civilians, and their involvement in the war effort. Respondents comprised a representative sample of the Jewish population in Israel. Our findings reveal a complex interplay between the factors, demonstrating the relevance of each factor to moral judgments. Notably, participants did not consider decisions on the battlefield to be independent of the justification of the war, a result which is consistent with the revisionist approach. We discuss the potential consequences of our findings on the understanding of commonsense morality and on the law. We also suggest that concepts derived from the social-psychological literature concerning moral self-regulation may help explain some of our findings.
Keywords: Common sense morality, Moral intuition, Experimental Philosophy, Collateral damage, Rules of engagment, Experimental field research
JEL Classification: K33
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?
What to Do with Bin Laden and Al Qaeda Terrorists?: A Qualified Defense of Military Commissions and United States Policy on Detainees at Guantanamo Bay Naval Base
U.S. Counterterrorism Policy and Superpower Compliance with International Human Rights Norms
Living Up to Rules: Holding Soldiers Responsible for Abusive Conduct and the Dilemma of the Superior Orders Defence
By Martha Minow
The Laws of War and the 'Lesser Evil'
Political Safeguards in Democracies at War
The Dispensable Lives of Soldiers
The Complexity of Disentangling Intrinsic and Extrinsic Compliance Motivations: Theoretical and Empirical Insights from the Behavioral Analysis of Law
The Individualization of War: From War to Policing in the Regulation of Armed Conflicts