Scribd Logo
Hochladen

Willkommen bei Scribd!

  • Rationality and The Use of Force WB Gallie

    Hochgeladen von

    James Dwyer
    47 Ansichten14 Seiten
    Brilliant argument as to whether or not it can be rational to use force, by the author of Essentially Contested Concepts WB Gallie 1970.

    Originaltitel

    Rationality and the Use of Force WB Gallie

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Verfügbare Formate

    PDF, TXT oder online auf Scribd lesen

    Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

    Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

    Dieses Dokument melden
    Brilliant argument as to whether or not it can be rational to use force, by the author of Essentially Contested Concepts WB Gallie 1970.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Als PDF, TXT herunterladen oder online auf Scribd lesen
    Markieren Sie unangemessene Inhalte
    47 Ansichten14 Seiten

    Rationality and The Use of Force WB Gallie

    Hochgeladen von

    James Dwyer
    Brilliant argument as to whether or not it can be rational to use force, by the author of Essentially Contested Concepts WB Gallie 1970.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Als PDF, TXT herunterladen oder online auf Scribd lesen
    Markieren Sie unangemessene Inhalte
    von 14
    PAPERS READ BEFORE THE SOOIETY gand SESSION 1970-71 I* The Presidential Address RATIONALITY AND THE USE OF FORCE by W. B. Gallie group, political unit) tries to Impose is (its) will upon & iccond party B, by cither making 2 stop doing something ‘one’s own will (or vay) in sieuations where one has feason to cupect opposition. “he assumption that acts of force employ, or presuppose the possibility of, certain physical operations Seems to tae truc of most—certainly of all the most socially Sigaificant—uses of force: it docs, however, entail the neglect Of certain borderline eames whose compultorinest seems to be purely mental or symbolic in character, eiz., certain accom- Plimments of hypnotist, witch-doctors, blackmailers and Bdvertisers. Touse the phrase “a use of force" te cover both (i) acts of force considered ae operations virtually irrespective of the ends for whieh they are Wfedertaken and (ft) act of force considered primarily ‘a2 {Ons of the policy decisions which. Iaurch them. ‘The need fi this distinction js clear fom the very Different kinds of ctiticiem one might level at, rg, a junior ‘of the Apitonslinn Susie, st 9/7 Tavmock Place, Tandon PRES Spe Ne Fs Ba oficer's or police constable’ attempt to implement an order, Snd at the order ieelf or atthe senior offer srho gave it But try then use the samme phrase fo blanket the ditnction Ihave ‘Jom drawn? Chintly because, n'a reat many easy, the 800 Senses oF lagss of forceusing are tescoped or inextricably interlocked, (This is mest obvious when he who decides and be who implement is one std the sate person. But ii also found whenever thee is a eontinaty of cormmand ad respons Dilty between tose whose jis exeasbly ony wo comiaand od those whose ob ir onensibly only to obey) And rot ofthe Points aod arguments of this paper apply to. forco-winge Whether considered ax operations or comidered ar foes. hosing oF expresions of poly dessins, ‘By raonalty im connexion with any ure of force I mean the sort of rama, or ground of masited sacra, that ie would be ‘tural to look for in view of the known ends or predomsingnt Entereats of the focceuaer, This presuppenes that there exis tc could be agreed, certain erteria by which act of force ean be judged, ertcned or commended from a purely pradental, gout tandpoint, entirely irespective of moral eonsidertion. Hoe. choice af vocabulary porns to.» general. procedural position which I wil ty to justly very brify. Tam convinced {hae the question of the moral Justeaton of feces cannot be'tetled by expanding so the Hilt dhe idea off Dradental justification aa with Hobbes, Spinows, Hage, and dies, But Tam equally convinced tha the moral jutfiation ‘of forcensing eamnot be profitably dlcued, until there i much tore explicit agreement ae tthe nature and scape of its prudential justification, whereas discussion of the fater fan be carried & long way without ducusion of the former. Hence che present attempt to elucidate the concept of force. ‘sing from & parely prudential pent of view, and to preserve fctain general principles of forcessing which may help ue to agree about the Hinds of thing that farce cam, and he Kids of dhng itcannot, be radonally expected to aceve (Gael. “Bo this endeavour might well evoke objections on a least the following grounds: () tat there can be bo peu. ‘ential justification of fore because foree- using af euch i ‘ater ivatoual; (i) uhee while force-asing admits of some familar potters ofjuncation there i nothing peculiar about j veanoyurry sto Ta Us oF ronce s these—the logic of foreering is basically no diferent fom that of any other practal at or techniques (i) that while fone can dicuss the rational of force-orng in different Selds, ‘civeation, puniahment, lawenforcement, was, trrorit ‘Sinpaigne wey, Quertons about foreessing “as such or 10 {general are pretentious uoneeae and simply donot arise inthe ‘ought of Ineligent and wellautored people ‘My answer to these objections will some out, If oaly by lnmplcatdon, as 1 proceed. Tmeation thom here becasae they certain very widely accepted asumptions—some plilowphical, some lay--which the argument ofthis paper fill show tobe umwarranted. At the same time, however i Tut be confewed that my arguments lac, aod may ell ser fom, explicit and established opposition. For, with hardly aa ‘cucepion, political and. social aod legal piloeophers have \gnored or sdestopped the questions about the ature, scope, ind effacy of act of force that T wash to rain. Bat does tit feus that Team to be dislosing, or toe om the track of, ntirey, new features or agpects of free, or entirely new Principles of foree-using? OF couse not. tn. particule the Priniples that fnuggeet have aways been followed in practice, Sihough without explicit articulation, by sagacious men of Seton. Which does not, however, lesen the impercance of {lying to articulate then ‘Madod. Ta Section TE T offer a partial elucidation of the ‘concept of foresaing. Its primary aim ir 9 bring oat he ‘many-idedness of this concept, and to bring home the fact that free i exentally « mary-puspen ourutsest. A tuber ‘of stent or a least very important fearores of the concept ‘ot force-sing are not dscuse at al fo instance ts pervasive few and indeed indispenealty in all organized human life {ts famous ambiguities both for those who use and thor who receive i the quetion of ts pesblecoutnuiy wih the whole Tiles cg igre ae og ary ara fon te side fhe coast ambiqonn aly with rpc 6 itd che ttre 1b cabigeoe ty Soak pee tle SO ‘Seuss he moretne fr tenet Smite, pete ey gamut of concepts that are popularly contrasted with it— Snduence, betbery, caloery, Bargaining, even persuasion on many ies; the quesdon of iy discontinuity with certain foneeps with whieh it is commodly aaocated rue, fou ‘and guile) and nally the queen whether forcesing may ‘04, St any rate when a all organize require certain moral piles Yn those who implemeat i. My eluddaton avotds Aiticul borderdine cats and concentrates on the central ea of fore-uting, on thse of iatances whee eompuboriagss SS unmistakable, And itr one-sided also in ae much ae bist practical cs concerned with we of fnce spy in 2 at 4s these ean be justified or extczed in practealy prudential term, Tn sum, the purpose of my elucidation isto rie the ‘questions the anawer to which supply, or at least indicate the deed for, the principles of forcesing which are sggested in Section HIT Ad agin, in presenting these principle, | make ‘bo calms t9 completes or srt. Tahal be sued i they point to aspece of rationality ta forceasiog which our eneralized thinking commonly neglects, Nor do T attempt ‘0 ‘ecide into what logical pigeon-holes my principles could be Sted. None of them, and perhaps no combination of ther, expresses a necesary, sll les a sullen, condition of the fatlomality of any set of fee; yet their relevance t0 sch ‘atoualiy i of curiously inmate hind, Rationality sms to equire Wat in every atuation the iavolves or ght ivolve forcesusng, we should attead to them ar being inherently Uiely wo affect the wisdom of our choice, even ugh in any pareular eave they may be oversidden or proved to have But ‘Bight practea relevance. " Ax idly single care. begin fom a type of forcousing by ‘oue party A against another B, which can be regarded at ‘Smoeptually base and simple on the grounds (0) that jt ‘means and mode of operation are ently physial—the act Of forcenusing obtains ts effect by a sequence of plyscal ‘peration: unmediated by threats or other sjmbels (i that ts mediate iaended efece na specie physical realt—an forced bodily action or eaforeed stat of romacton on D's ‘at; (Gi) that, is objective gained, the operation of orce- [RATIONALITY AND Te AE OF FORCE 5 ting x complete—there ino “openended consmitment” far Awe wae further force, 2g, to old what he has achieved; Gv) cha its reli een, or as near-certain as procial We Allowe—we assume that Aha all the means that he requires, {ha his strength is immenrorably superior to Bs, dh he bat Planned time and place co give him every advantage, and 20 on. To olfer « somewhat lord example, Gangter quely ‘hler my house, exaly overpower me, bind, fag aed bindotd ie, then Hogmarch me out into the open stert aad the vesting ean, and drive me to a hideout where (let hope) they onbind me, but beep ine under lock and key with oo means of communicating with the outside wr If we con Central upon the Hog-marching, cardeving, and. inca. ‘cersing parte—in bref the impala part--of tis nightmare, ‘we would naturally sey atthe gangsters positively enforced Uke wil upon me by making me do what they wanted. IF we concentrate on the gaging aod binding and ultimate in Deening-—in brief the retretive para—it would be natal To ieeite the act of forcesuing. in negative terme: the angers were fib sopping me, from their own point of ‘lew, fom dang sething specie, bat om my point of view liom doing virtually anything T might normally’ wish to do. The signiteance of this fwouded:nes ia the ideally simple sot offorce 8 the fs topie that T want to discus. Thereafter Thal use our ideally stoples case or type of foree-using at a Lind of baseline Bun which swe ean Wace out at leat four Aiferent lines of posible Increasing complication fr any act offre afc, in epect of mediation by symbols of variety of Enmodinte clit, Canentinent to continued focoosag, aad finally in respec of ciferent soures of uncertain "Pst and mae reer of ocean. For the general logic of statements poste and negative ae equipollent noone not simply becausefevery true positive statement implies at Teast one negative sptement and conver, but Decne al controllable speech And thought involve, forthe extablshiment fr acceptance of auy statement, the capacity to eject aay Sumber of tough) contrary statement. Hence o anert or Socept tat «i the case, responsibly and knowing What one is Going, inveves tat one undertands, however vaguely, what |e would mean to deny that + isthe ease. Similary, when ne 6 wom eae is saked—or peuaded or ordered—to do something: one rust undentand, however vaguely, that some thingy ‘are therefore wot to be done. But dow tht postion hold when ane {is reed to do something or is orebly stopped or prevented fora dolng something? In great many cases coranly does IFT am foreed 10 am, I'am thereby foribly prevented from standing or walking, and very quickly realize tht this i the ‘ase; and simulaly if am forcibly prevented from walking or ‘anding or what have you. Bt faa certain amber of eases ‘fenforcement there is 2 tworbld dlfresee [athe fist place In 50 far as udstaning of what i bing fread now figures in the situation ts pastive and negative aspects sem to admit of ‘complete dimciaton. And secondly, irespective of whether fr how such understanding figures in the niwatioa, there may ‘no longer be aa equlpollence of posive and negative aspects of the act oF fet of free- Ie may be simply that something is Stopped or prevented and that no positive counterpart is beng ‘oforoed ata. ‘To take up these wo claims in turn. (2) Should 1 find mye attacked, fogimarched and driven into the wilds by fabesters, I wil no doubt be confusedly aware of what I a Seing forced to do: but this semse of lng forced need ot ecesarly suggest any recognition or appreciation of what Tam thereby being prevented fom doing. This disocation is sll more evident in cast where the negative arpet of free: ‘sing predominates; og, if, emerging from sbock and teror, T should God rayself bound, gagged and without light, in a sonal! locked cell. The inteaity of my resrctednest-of what Tam being forcibly prevented Gora doing-—would be ir. eduubly evident; but Sie unlikely chat 1 should fel melt being positively compelled to do anything at all. For what sould I be doing? Jt remaining where 1 aim i0't doing ‘Sything. I am of course, «x path and D.V, stil breathing Sod thinking. But ex ypotld again, chee minimal acter fave been left voluntary, i, have femained oubide the aim athe act of fore to which Ihave been subjected. In both the examples above I have spten offing mpilf subjected wo cera forms of force. This points 10 the fact that Sten the most rudimentary understanding of what one is being forced to do isnot a nectnary Ieature of being subjected © t RATIONALITY AXD THE URE OF FoR 7 force. And this i trae even inthe kind of case in which, for the act offorce to nce til intended eet, mist eventeally be got to resognize what T am bring, or have already been, forced to do, The Immediate eBeacy of an act of free need ‘not be matched by any answering or appreciative change of mny state of consciousness: the act of free works when and in to far ae effers a required alteration im my wil or capacity fr farther resitaace. And tis alteration, in Many cate, St ‘ccompanied not by any understanding of what is happening tome but by a confied break or Han in my appeecation ot {the stuston, ‘The supreme instanceof thie fy of course, when fan act of free by 4 agaimat B takes the form of skiing B. For in tis istance B may wel have no idea of what is ape ‘ening to hit, and ie hay its ikely that pani or despair ‘wil bot out Bom his mind all ought of the things be ie thereby being topped trom doing. (i) With tas instance we alo reach the srt of situation ia ‘which che usual equipallence ofthe portive aod negative ides (of action no longer holds. When 4 Els B there i an obviout sense in which he thereby stops him from doing anything Ages nl hes cee ng ta eying "We have slo noticed Wat fe in cance of Poe: Eeeinenty negative enfororment, egy when 1 find mye incarcerated, that the onesided (hore. nogativelysigned) character of the situation extends beyond (he conseouest of the person enforced to the ultimate fats of the situation. (Being carceratd T am stopped from doing anything that 1 would normally want wo do, yet Tam not forced to do any thing in particular) This ras the question whether the fominance of the negative aspect of frce-sing jn these Instance: is of more general significance, especially ftom the Point of view of practical prodence. “An initally plausible argument to this effect can be urged ‘on gtounds of efcency and sconemy. A man can be made ‘wall in cera dieetion by main force or by the preure of 2'gun in his back; and in certain creumatance thee eould be ‘egared as efficient and eve economic wes of force. But if we {awa columsr of thousand prisoner each of whom wat bei {bread along in one of ese ways, we would thik the seu Indierous, We would ask why the column of unarmed men ‘could not be kept fom exaping, straggling or topping (except ‘when ordered) by bandfl of armed ‘nd welrpextioned (guards, Consider another contrast. A handfal of well-placed fd suitably armed guards ean, by the visible threat oftheir irepower, sop © thousand prisoners fom even trying 10 ‘ccape from a compound, But muppose the same threat were ‘ployed, ina thotsand-Qld greater ength, to ensure that ‘cach ofthe peioners worked constanly at his agned duties: the remling picture would agun be oterly Iudierour—~enlest were hypoeriial excuse for masacre. These instances 30 com f0 nugget @ general, and aot purely contingent, wrath, ‘ey that free leon the whole much more effective. and ‘conomie as a stopper of human actions than as a starter or ‘lrector of them. And even wea force i wid to stator direct tome process in a posive manner, eg, to get a columa of ‘ruoners to march, i seem to succeed in doing this reliably find ecouorically only within station in which f hat ‘ready been tsed to ensore an exentially negative real Eg, in the case of our prisoners, force has already stopped them ftom offering resstanee, and disarmed and dsorganaed them so that rexitance cannot ea be resumed. ‘A second argument in the same general direction. Suppose we ee two parties and B engaged in deadly confit, bt do ‘ot as yet Know the objectives of either party. 4 appears to Ihave the upper hand, but is cleasly determined to fight the last, throwing in all posible reserves, s0 that we naturally ‘wonder what is at stake for B. Suppose we lear that B is pledged or determined to ight tothe lat gasp to foree certain positively prescribed steps upon a. Our natural reaction will be co suspect that B (ris goverament) iva band of fanatics. Had we earat that Bs objective was tostop A from some acon ‘which B found intolerable—leaving fe open what thereafter ‘hove of could be perusded or bribed fo do-—our immodinte ‘action would be much more sympathete. To be sure, we ‘night come to learn that, by topping tom doing » Bas {in face facing with only one alternative y, whichis known to be intlertle to him. Im which ease ot inital sympathy. ‘with B would be mistaken. But in am cnormoss sumer of (Guc, an increas and intensification of the woe of force it Jurdifable when the objective i negative in character, which [RATIOEALITY AND TUE USE OF FORGE 9 ‘would be wicked and lunatical when the objective i postive. “Certain forms of action must be stopped, and can be stopped. ‘only, by fore, Admitedly, ats certnin point increase in the fot required may become suicidal or may cate even preter hrm than that which itis insended to remove, But that point ‘would have been reached very auch rooue i force were being tied to ensure some positive im, and « forion the more specif and complex that aim shovld be. “Acid argument, inthe sme (admittedly a yt very vagus)

    Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen