A New Science of International Relations: Modernity, Complexity and the Kosovo Conflict by Damian Popolo

Author:Damian Popolo [Popolo, Damian]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: Political Science, General
ISBN: 9781317187264
Google: rh3ACwAAQBAJ
Goodreads: 29642224
Publisher: Routledge
Published: 2010-12-01T00:00:00+00:00

Metaphysical Law and Ethical Categorisations

An interesting categorisation of approaches to the problem of ethics has been conducted by Holzgrefe in the collective work Humanitarian Intervention: Ethical, Legal and Political Dilemmas.121 The categorisation of ethical approaches perfectly illustrates the essentially Kantian divide present in all arguments. According to Holzgrefe, we could design an ethical chart with four axes or dimensions, each with two extreme poles. The first ethical divide would consist of concerns over the source of moral concern. Here, we would find that “Naturalist theories of international justice contend that morally binding international norms are an inherent feature of the world” whilst “Consensualist theories…claim that moral authority of any given international norm derives from the explicit or tacit consent of the agents subject to that norm”.122

The second ethical divide deals with the appropriate objects of moral concern. Here, we find that “Individualist theories of international justice are concerned ultimately with the welfare of individual human beings” while “collectivist theories…maintain that groups – typically ethnic groups, races, nations, or states – are the proper objects of moral concern”.123 The third ethical divide is related to the appropriate weight of moral concern. Here, “Egalitarian theories of international justice claim that the objects of moral concern must be treated equally” whilst “Inegalitarian theories…require or permit them to be treated unequally”.124 Finally, the fourth ethical divide regards the proper width of moral concern. Here, “Universalist theories assert that all relevant agents – wherever they exist – are the proper objects of moral concern”. On the contrary, “Particularist theories…hold that only certain agents…are the proper objects of moral concern”.125

The fact that Holzgrefe is able to devise such a taxinomia and to classify utilitarianism, natural law, social contractarianism, communitarianism and legal positivism according to its principles is telling. In the end, it is simple to discern the different approaches to the empirico-transcendental doublet inherent in the modern episteme. The problem inherent in approaching such ‘divides’ from one extreme or the other is not a concern of contemporary ethical theory: it is just assumed that positions and the extremes of such divides are irreconcilable. Interpretations of specific events can thus always be preceded by qualifications such as ‘under X approach’. A telling example: supporters of ‘act-utilitarianism’ claim that any military action is justified if it saves more lives than it loses: “Thus, for example, NATO’s killing of 10 civilian employees of Radio Television Serbia (RTS) in Belgrade during Operation Allied Force could be justified on act-utilitarian grounds if destroying ‘a source of propaganda that is prolonging this war and causing untold new suffering to the people of Kosovo’ [quote by Claire Short] saved more lives than it cost.”126

Presumably, it would be safe to assume that Claire Short, Madeleine Albright (we believe that the price is worth it…) and Tony Blair (I cannot apologise for removing a brutal dictator…) are all act-utilitarians. Is it not the case that ultimately the arguments of this group represent a classical example of morality, understood as Luhmann does, as a concern emanating

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.