JOURNAL ARTICLE

Between Traditionalism and Revisionism: Estlund and Renzo on the Obligation to Obey Orders to Fight in Unjust Wars.

  • Published In: Ratio Juris, 2023, v. 36, n. 4. P. 350 1 of 3

  • Database: Academic Search Ultimate 2 of 3

  • Authored By: Venezia, Luciano; Sánchez Brígido, Rodrigo E. 3 of 3

Abstract

David Estlund and Massimo Renzo argue that, given the right background conditions, combatants are obligated to obey orders to fight in unjust wars, a thesis they put forward even as they recognize that this involves committing serious moral wrongs. Their views, then, fall between traditionalism and revisionism in the theory of just war. We argue that both Estlund and Renzo fail to adequately distinguish between binding and nonbinding serious morally wrong orders, that their views are incompatible with their assumed fact‐relative understanding of morality, and that they fail to establish that combatants are obligated to obey orders to fight in unjust wars. We conclude that just as untenable as these two middle‐ground positions is the traditionalist view. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Additional Information

  • Source:Ratio Juris. 2023/12, Vol. 36, Issue 4, p350
  • Document Type:Article
  • Subject Area:Religion and Philosophy
  • Publication Date:2023
  • ISSN:0952-1917
  • DOI:10.1111/raju.12393
  • Accession Number:173586454
  • Copyright Statement:Copyright of Ratio Juris is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Looking to go deeper into this topic? Look for more articles on EBSCOhost.