Waging modern war: An analysis of the moral literature on the nuclear arms debate

Thesis/Dissertation · Wed Jan 01 04:00:00 EST 1992

OSTI ID:7185473

Palmer-Fernandez, G F

The primary aim was to examine the dominant views on the subject of deterrence and the use of nuclear weapons, to compare them with each other, and to consider objections that have or might be made against them. A second, more controversial and substantive, aim was to show that nuclear weapons and war-fighting plans engender some disturbing moral dilemmas that call into question fundamental ways of thinking about morality and some of the common intuitions on the relation of intentions and actions. The author examines the moral literature, both religious and secular, on nuclear arms policy written between the early 1960s and the late 1980s. Three different schools of thought, or parties,' are identified. To establish the differences among these parties, the author shows the various ways in which judgments on the use of nuclear weapons and on deterrence are linked either by a prohibitive moral principle which draws a moral equivalence going from action to intention or by a factual assumption about the nature of nuclear weapons. He concludes with the suggestion that the dilemmas that arise in the moral evaluation of nuclear deterrence represent a profound and much wider problem in moral theory between the ideals of character and the moral claims of politics.

• Research Organization: Harvard Univ., Cambridge, MA (United States)
• OSTI ID: 7185473
• Country of Publication: United States
• Language: English

Related Subjects

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY
290600* -- Energy Planning & Policy-- Nuclear Energy
350000 -- Arms Control-- (1987-)
98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL PROTECTION
ADVERSARIES
DECISION MAKING
ETHICAL ASPECTS
INSTITUTIONAL FACTORS
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE
NUCLEAR WEAPONS
POLITICAL ASPECTS
WARFARE
WEAPONS