Psychological Contributions to Philosophy: The cases of Just War Theory and Nonviolence

L.Y. Adelman*, Bernhard Leidner, Seyyed Nima Orazani

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterAcademic

Abstract

Moral philosophy has laid out theories for conduct during wartime and the use of nonviolence. Yet, how do these theories map onto people’s actual behavior? A first set of studies tested people’s use of Just War principles in evaluating wartime conduct. Adelman, Orazano and Leidner show that people utilize the jus in bello principles of necessity, discrimination and proportionality to judge the justness of wars, but to different degrees, depending on their moral principles. A second set of studies experimentally investigates whether nonviolence is a viable strategy for social movements struggling against oppression. Adelman, Orazano and Leidner provide converging evidence for a model of nonviolent struggles in Bahrain, Iran, and the United States, demonstrating that nonviolent movements are more effective at generating support and increasing membership. In sum, people do largely seem to behave as philosophical theories have prescribed, but sometimes in a way limited by psychological bias.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationThe Nature of Peace and the Morality of Armed Conflict.
PublisherPalgrave Macmillan
Pages267-291
ISBN (Electronic)978-3-319-57123-2
ISBN (Print)978-3-319-57122-5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2017
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • military ethics
  • war
  • nonviolence

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Psychological Contributions to Philosophy: The cases of Just War Theory and Nonviolence'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this