Michael Walzer, Professor Emeritus, Institute for
Advanced Study, Princeton New Jersey. (1935 - )
(Photo from Sienna College web page on Living Philosophers,
http://www.siena.edu/pages/6198.asp)
Walzer thinks that the US decision to
drop atomic bomb on two cities in
Japan at the end of WWII was
A. Justified.
B. Unjustified.
Why?
How does this fit with his views on
double effect?
Consequentialist paper
•
•
•
•
A. State thesis.
B. State and explain normative principle.
C. Defend your NP here, or do it at end.
D. Present empirical facts to show that the
likely consequences of the action in question
are or are not better than the consequences
of the alternative.
• E. Defend NP after that case is made if you
didn’t do it above.
Pacifist Paper
A. State thesis: War in question is not justified.
B. State that you are arguing from a pacifist normative
principle that forbids lethal violence against persons.
C. Explain that the war in question involves lethal
violence and thus are banned by your NP.
D. Spend the vast majority of the paper defending the
NP, since it is the only controversial claim you are
using to support your conclusion. Be sure to use
some argument that does not rely on religious
premises, since you want to convince those who don’t
agree with you on religion.
Just War Theory Paper
• A. State thesis.
• B. Explain that you are using JWT to argue for it. Either give
the details of the theory here, or let you reader know that
you’ll give those details in subsequent parts of the paper
where you will also assess whether they have been met.
• C. Either defend the JWT theory and your interpretation of
its relevant parts or tell the reader you’ll do that for each
criterion as you discuss whether it has been met.
• D. Go through each criterion that is relevant to your case
and show it was or was not met. (If you are arguing that
the war in question is justified, you need to show that all
are met. If you are arguing that it wasn’t it is probably wise
to focus on these that weren’t met.)
Another sort of paper
• A. Someone could argue that no matter what
reasonable normative theory about the justification of
wars one accepts a war is not justified.
• B. You could argue that every sensible theory that
permits wars, consequentialist or non-consequentialist,
includes some way of taking into account the overall
goodness or badness of consequences.
– If you do this you will want to argue that this makes sense
to take into account and that argument will be equivalent
to defending a (part of a) NP.
• C. Then use empirical claims to argue that all such
theories will rule the war in question unjustified by
arguing about the consequences.
Plagiarism
• 1. It is permissible to get help from other people but if you do you
should give them credit – perhaps in a first or last footnote if the
help is general, at the spot where you use their idea if it is specific.
• 2. If you use a source for information or to borrow ideas and
arguments from, it should also be cited at the point in your text
where you use that source.
• 3. You should be using your own words throughout unless you are
quoting someone. And quotations should be in quotation marks or
(if a longer quote) indented. And the source should be clearly
given.
• 4. Any citation format that allows a reader to easily find the source
will be OK. One way is author, year, and page number in
parentheses in the text and all sources in a bibliography. Another is
a genuine footnote or endnote with numbers in the text.
Homework due in sections this week:
• 1. Look up and quote the relevant language about
plagiarism from the student code of conduct. Bring it with
you to sections.
• 2. Have a look at the graduate studies website page on
plagiarism at
http://www.unl.edu/gradstudies/current/plagiarism#about
(It is better than the undergrad page on related topics,
though it too has a few things I’d quibble about, specifically
what it says about “interpretations” in the terminology
section.)
• 3. Write a 1 page paper or paper fragment about whatever
you want. Violate the rules (two different ones) about
plagiarism twice in that page. Then write up the same page
with the citations and quotations done correctly.
Reading for the Next Class:
•
http://www.princeton.edu/~reinhard/pdfs/100-NEXT_HOW_ECONOMISTS_BASTARDIZED_BENTHAMITE_UTILITARIANISM.pdf
• This is a handout from Uwe Reinhardt for his Economics 100 class. He is a
Professor of Economics and Public Affairs at Princeton University.
• This handout gives a good sense for how a Benthamite Utilitarian might
approach the distribution of money, given the idea that we want to
maximize overall happiness.
• No Reading for Wednesday the 14, but do the homework on plagiarism.