Cicero, Aristotle, Plato – Just Warrior

Tory Macdonald 9. 25. 12 morals of struggle and Peace set about 1 My question Plato, Aristotle and Cicero separately(prenominal) talked about merely war Theory, and emphasis on the Just strugglerior. Obedience and loyalty ( can lead to destruction. Plato, Aristotle and Cicero, the fathers of the Just War tradition, develop and enhance the concept of civic virtue and the de bitd to up conduct such morality during the most chaotic, violent and brutal of measure cont complete. They each defend the necessity of warfargonf atomic number 18f ar unless emphasize the crystallize code of conduct in war and what makes an healthy and scarcely warrior.Today, war is much less engrained in our culture our sons be non innate(p) with the future of a warrior. However, when there is war, we hear of populacey un nevertheless and shameful acts such as stack rape, genocide, or specifically the My Lai slaughterhouse. Plato, Aristotle and Cicero lived through a culture of war, defend ing it as necessary to keeping the peace. Because it was so engrained in their culture, a normalcy, they were not as botherationed with the inhumane brain that defines war- cleanup position an early(a) human being. Today, we do not live in a culture of constant war, therefore we are to a greater extent susceptible to change state overwhelmed by the trauma of violence.Plato, Aristotle and Cicero, provide guidelines of a scantily warrior however, had not yet discovered what it is that can turn a approximate man into a bad one, and what horrible aspects of war he may fall dupe to. Today, true digestry symbolizes fighting against delight, because unfortunately, war turns the most honor able-bodied custody into purchasable ones. Plato is a philosopher who lived from 469-399 through the Peloponnesian Wars and stressed the legal opinion that for man, there is well-nigh topic worse than final stage- an unreflective life. Plato causeed that all people should give to be pio us, or good.He noted that piety is what the Gods hold dear, what all the Gods agree upon therefore, it is these morals that the people should uphold. In war, a pass should not fear death but rather fear a dishonorable or impious life. He should rather die from tor handst than he should from shame. The same idea should be used when deciding to go to war or not. There moldiness always be a just reason. In a conversation amidst Alcibiades and Socrates, Plato describes the importance of waging war for a just cause. Soc Dont you know that when we make war we begin to wage war after accusing each other of some affront and what term we use when we begin?Alc I do we say we father been deceived, or done violence to, or deprived of something. 1 He then elaborates to whom a war can be cl oriented against Soc Now, what of this? Whom give you advise the Athenians to wage war against, those behaving unjustly or those practicing the just things? Alc What you are asking is a terrible thing f or even if someone had it in his mind that war ought to be waged against those practicing the just things, he would not approve to it, at least. 2 Plato seeks the unbiased truth, a critical reflection on wherefore and what to do in a situation, especially regarding war.Each of his answers comes screen to being pious and reflective. He believes that war is necessary to keep up a good state, however believes it especially important to uphold pious and virtuous standards as a just warrior, in a just cause, using just means, to accomplish just ends. Aristotle is the founder of virtue ethics or Jus in bello, just actions in war. Aristotle claimed that virtues are described as a mean of excellence, a center in the midst of two extremes excess and deficiency. For utilization, courageousness is a balance between cowardice and recklessness.Prudence is practical wisdom that determines the mean of all virtues essentially what determines the mean between two extremes. This is especially i mportant in defining the virtues of a warrior. Aristotle believes that a just warrior is a man who exhibits courage and commits actions that are hardly magisterial. He states there should be a excogitation to his fighting, something he is willing to die for. A just warrior chooses to endure things because it is noble. He will fear them as he ought and as reason come up tos, and he will face them for the sake of what is noble, for this is the end of excellence. 3 He notes that a undismayed man is not a fearless one, but one who faces those fears because it is right. Aristotle excessively notes that, Courage is noble. Therefore the end is also noble for each thing is defined by its end. Therefore it is for a noble end that the brave man endures and acts as courage directs. 4 Aristotle emphasizes that a just warrior fights only for a just cause. Aristotle also illustrates fivesome different fibres of courage and their honorable uses. The set-back is political courage. iodin w ho exhibits political courage fears shame rather than pain in the ass or punishment.The second is that courage is knowledge. He notes, While the former from the real beginning faced the endangerment on the assumption they were stronger, and when they know the facts they fly, fearing death more than disgrace but the brave man is not that anatomy of soulfulness. 5 He explains that when one knows of the danger, and still plows ahead, he is courageous. The third is that furor should aid morals, however feelings are not bravery and emotions should not call louder than reason. As Homer noted, put strength into his passion6 as those who are passionate are often eager to rush into danger.The fourth states that rubicund people are not brave, for they are confident in danger only because they render conquered often against many foeswhen their adventures do not gain however, they run away but it was the mark of a brave man to face things that are. 7 A noble man acts on character, no t calculations. The twenty percent point is that courage does not mean people who are ignorant. Those who do not know and succeed are not brave, just lucky. Cicero who lived from 106 to 43 BC, created the Peace Movement that moved away from best defense is a good offense to the idea of constant civic virtue.He strongly express that war must be undertaken with the aim of peace. He believed that war must be a last resort and a declaration between two parties. For this we can grasp that no war is just unless it is waged after a formal demand for restoration, or unless it has been formally announced and defyd beforehand. 8 Justice was to be maintained amongst all participants. He was the first to declare that war was not a world apart, and that atrocities committed at an international level were not different as if they were committed in ones protest state.Cicero stated that the moral fellowship of man smorgasbord should know no boundaries. 9 This correlates with his idea of natur al law a natural fellowship that exists amongst all humans, which disposition has provided for all men to treat each other morally. There are commonalities amongst all men, no matter if he is a sea away, and Cicero believed that each warrior to act justly was to uphold that concept. Cicero also stressed that the fighting during war must always be towards an honorable end.He notes that a just warrior does not think of self-interest saying, However, if the loftiness of spirit that reveals itself amid danger and toil is invalidate of judge, if it fights not for the common safety but for its own advantages, it is a vice. 10 He also values reasons that make decisions over courage that incites battle. A just warrior fights on behalf of legality11. A just warrior must also be able to balance reason with his cause. Cicero notes, However, we must consumption the body, training it so that when it has to attend to business or endure hard work it is able to obey counsel and reason. 12 Jus t because a warrior is fighting for a noble cause, does not mean he can lose sight of the just reasoning behind it and we must train our soldiers so that this doesnt feel. The My Lai abattoir on March 16th, 1968 was the mass murder of somewhere between 347 to calciferol innocent, unarmed village people of Southern Vietnam. 13 The fall in States military men of the Company C Charlie of the 1st Battalion committed the acts that included mass murder, mutilation, ransacking and rape. Lead into the area under a false meter reading of dense enemy activity, they were met with women, children, and the elderly.Although the men had not yet suffered any direct attack in the first months of their deployment, they had suffered mines and booby traps, losing many men. 14 The company was give orders by Captain Ernest Medina, who clearly stated that all those who were enemies or waited analogous enemies were to be taken down. 15 The company lead by Second lieutenant William Calley then went in to the village, and began firing at what was supposed to be hard enemies. 16 The violence escalated and the brutality did not stop.Several men participated, several men stood back and watched. Only one man, Warrant Officer Scout Hugh Thompson who had spotted the murder from a helicopter, sacrificed his life and the lives of his men to stop the atrocities. 17 To this day, only one man has been convicted of war crimes and only served three years of house arrest. The others were left alone. Today, the My Lai Massacre is looked at as the epitome of the Vietnam War- a mistake, a terrible snip of confusion, an example of the psychological traumas of war.Most importantly, it is an example of how easily dishonor can taint moral reasoning. These men were angry to have lost their fellow brothers in mines and booby traps, they were scared, they were starving, and they were not in their natural mind. A soldier states of that day, Yes I am ashamed, Im sorry and Im illegal but I did itIf you go to war, those are the types of things that happen and can happen to anyoneIt can happen, it happens, that is what war isWar is war, its killing all type of ways. 18 When a dishonor was done to them, when dishonor is all around them, dishonor is what they begin to do too. Today the dishonors of war range from obedience to a terrible leader, to dehumanizing the enemy so inhumane actions suddenly seem right. In the case of the My Lai Massacre, many soldiers involved to this day claim that they were just historicalime orders and that their loyal obedience overtook their moral compasses. One soldier noted, At no time it ever crossed my mind to disobey or to recall to carry out an order that was issued by my superiors.I shudder to think what the repercussions would have been 19 The soldiers were fighting in a perceived honor and loyalty to the United States. The need to please and obey took the pressure off of their actions, because someone else was dictating them. In other ins tances, soldiers would dehumanize their enemy to get through the idea of killing them. Cicero notes that this is entirely wrong according to natural law Perhaps we should contemplate more thoroughly what are the natural principles of human fellowship and community.First it is something that is seen in the fellowship of the entire human race. For its bonding consists of reason and speech, which reconcile men to one another, through teaching, learning, communicating, debating, and making judgments, and unite them in a kind of natural fellowship. It is this that most distances us from the nature of other animals. To them we often delegate courage, as with horses or lions, but we do not impute them justice, fairness or goodness. For they have no share in reason and speech. 20 Cicero states that since we are all of peech and reason, we are all human. However, dehumanization, where one dehumanizes their enemy and views them as some sort of animal, is a common strategy and conflict in like a shots wars. The Holocaust, the Bosnian and Rwandan genocide are all examples of dehumanization. The Nazi soldiers truly believed that they were ridding their country of vermin, and the Hutu soldiers considered the Tutsi people to be cockroaches. Similarly, soldiers fighting in the Vietnam War referred to their enemies as animals, less than human and the massacre is a clear example of that.Perhaps the rules have changed since wars progressed through time. Todays atrocities dont seem as atrocious to us as they would to Plato, Aristotle and Cicero because we have become devoted to them, as they were accustomed to having a culture of war. Peter Olsthoorn stated in his book Just Warriors Soldiers, although far from selfish, cannot be expected to perform their duties from a sense of duty alone. Both inside and outside the sphere of war, only the abruptly wise act virtuously for virtues sake.However those perfectly wise are rare, Cicero himself claimed that he had never met such a personFor the not so wise, that is, most of us, a little help from the outside, consisting of the judgments of our peers and our concern for our reputation, can be of help. 21 Looking back on the massacre, many men are quick to point out the outside factors that effected their look such as their loyalty, fear, confusion, lack of direction, even a blank blackout. One man notes, We felt what we were doing was right, and after it was over we knew it was wrong. 22 These soldiers eventually are able to reflect. However at the time, they were worried for themselves, acting out of vengeance and self interest, therefore were not leading an honorable life. Officer Thompson exhibited true courage of a just warrior. He saw that the bodies consisted of mostly babies, children, women and the elderly, without a imperil combatant or weapon in sight. After several failed communicate transmissions, he ordered his men to land on sight and aim their guns at their fellow American soldiers.He ordere d that they would hold their positions against their bothers until they had agreed to a cease-fire and stopped the massacre. While doing this he walked out unarmed, entered a disgorge and rescued a woman and her child. Officer Thompson knew what he was getting himself into. He recognized that his loyalty to his fellow Americans was the wrong kind of loyalty. He pushed past fear and fought for a noble cause, to save the people. He did not snarl anyone down to do it, but was prepared to do so to end an injustice. Thompson used honorable means to obtain an honorable end.He illustrated every of the five points Aristotle noted a just warrior should be. He was courageous but not reckless, and he proved that in an unjust war, in and unjust setting, justice still prevails. Plato, Aristotle, and Cicero believe that a warriors honor is the ability to exercise restraint under chaotic and emotionally taxing experiences. It is not plain standing firm in battle or committing acts of heroic bra very. It is recognizing the differences between combatant and noncombatant, between the innocent and the guilty and acting with reason when reason is hard to find.Today, it is about escaping the dishonor. War is about entering with the right reasons and divergence with the correct ends. War can make an honorable man, a dishonorable one and the three philosophers explain that real courage, is tackling war itself and not locomote victim to the demons. If they had been alive at the time their general philosophy would have stood, the advancing atrocities just would have made it that much harder and much more honorable to be a real, true just warrior. Bibliography Reichberg, Gregory M. Henrik Syse, and Endre Begby, eds. The moral philosophy of War authoritative and Contemporary Readings. Blackwell, 2006. Print. Baker, Deane-Peter. Just Warriors, Inc. London Continuum International Publishing Group, 2011. Unknown. The My Lai Massacre. PBS. PBS, 29 Mar. 2009. Web. 05 Oct. 2012. . Wiki pedia. org YmBigBen90 (Users ID). My Lai Massacre Part One of Two. YouTube. YouTube, 16 May 2009. Web. 02 Oct. 2012. 1 Reichberg, Gregory M. , Henrik Syse, and Endre Begby, eds. The Ethics of War Classic and Contemporary Readings.Blackwell, 2006. Print. 2 Ibid. 3 4 Reichberg, Gregory M. , Henrik Syse, and Endre Begby, eds. The Ethics of War Classic and Contemporary Readings. Blackwell, 2006. Print. 5 Ibid. 6 Ibid. 7 Ibid. 8 Ibid. 9 Ibid. 10 Reichberg, Gregory M. , Henrik Syse, and Endre Begby, eds. The Ethics of War Classic and Contemporary Readings. Blackwell, 2006. Print. 11 Ibid. 12 Ibid. 13 Ibid. 14 Wikipedia. org 15 Unknown. The My Lai Massacre. PBS. PBS, 29 Mar. 2009. Web. 05 Oct. 2012. . 16 Unknown. The My Lai Massacre. PBS. PBS, 29 Mar. 2009. Web. 05 Oct. 2012. . 17 Ibid. 18 Ibid. 19 Unknown. The My Lai Massacre. PBS. PBS, 29 Mar. 2009. Web. 05 Oct. 2012. . 20 Ibid. 21 Reichberg, Gregory M. , Henrik Syse, and Endre Begby, eds. The Ethics of War Classic and Contemporary Readings. Blackwell, 2006. Print. 22 Baker, Deane-Peter. Just Warriors, Inc. London Continuum International Publishing Group, 2011. 23 YmBigBen90 (Users ID). My Lai Massacre Part One of Two. YouTube. YouTube, 16 May 2009. Web. 02 Oct. 2012.