Thursday, April 25, 2013
WR: The Qur'an's 'Just War' Theory
Karen Armstrong comments on the Qur'an making known a just war theory, as a practical idea, alluding to the fact that there will always be conflict between nations and nation states. This has often been a criticism of the turn-the-other-cheek philosophy of Christianity; in other words, the idea of complete nonviolence (not even self-defense) is unrealistic in a world of (somewhat) constant conflict. Thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The thing that is left out of criticizing total non-violence is the fact that non-violence does not mean non-action. You can still change a person through words alone, or at least try to do so. And if enough people keep saying the same thing without also turning to violence, then in time those using violence against the non-violent will come to a stop.
ReplyDeleteAt least, that is the hope, and there is some psychology research to back it up. Since humans are such social creatures, we get rather uncomfortable when it seems that there is no one who shares our ideas and beliefs. Because of that, if you keep doing something, and no one ever gives you praise (or worse, if the only reply you get is negative), you will eventually have to find a way to deal with our pre-wired drive to fit in with the group. Living in groups is what allowed us to survive as a species, which is why conformity is such a large part of our character.
I definitely agree with your first point! In fact,I would say that nonviolent action is more effective than violent action, even from a statistical standpoint.
DeleteAll of these are true, but I think both can occur and exist at one point or another. I think the better option is pacifism. The pacifism I speak of varies in degrees. When I was in Theories of Justice with Paul Nnodim, we learned that pacifism is not necessarily complete non-violence; rather, in some cases it allows violence as a necessary evil to be used in order to accomplish some better end.
ReplyDeleteRaj makes a good point about pacifism, but I wonder if using violence as a means to justify ends contradicts the fundamental principle of pacifism. I.e., that war is always wrong, and means cannot rightly justify ends. One of a possible type of nonviolent action Kaz speaks of is Gandhi’s campaign of Satyagraha, and the principle of Ahimsa.
ReplyDeleteAll good points. I just want to remind us that Jesus' "turn the other cheek" is not passive acquiescence to oppression, or even pacifism necessarily, but in fact an in-your-face subversion of hierarchy, putting the brutality of the aggressor on display.
ReplyDelete