Philosophy, Morality, and International Affairs: Essays Edited for the Society for Philosophy and Public Affairs
Files
Description
The Society for Philosophy and Public Affairs was founded in 1969 as the natural expression of a rising interest in questions of public policy among students and teachers of philosophy. This interest was due partly to a growing conviction that the connections between abstract and practical questions could be effectively drawn, and that the failure to do so could be unfortunate for the pursuit of either interest. The task was a double one: to overcome the detachment of philosophy from concrete social issues and to challenge the widespread complacency about American institutions and practices. The formation of the Society was also due to the concern, outrage, and sense of helplessness aroused in varying degrees among philosophers by the Vietnam War. Philosophy seemed ill-equipped to handle questions raised by the war. Like many Americans, philosophers have tended to react profoundly to that event, and have felt impelled to speak about real circumstances and real policies in order to decide what to believe and how to act. The Society for Philosophy and Public Affairs, in its group meetings and in symposia held at sessions of the American Philosophical Association, has provided a forum for discussions arising from these concerns. In 1972, the New York Group of the Society published a collection of essays entitled Philosophy and Political Action under the editorship of Virginia Held, Kai Nielsen, and Charles Parsons. It was drawn together from papers presented at meetings of the group or written by members and associates. In view of the response to the publication of this volume, the Executive Committee of the national Society issued a call for papers dealing specifically with philosophy and international affairs. It subsequently requested the undersigned editors to bring out the present volume, which draws on the work of members throughout the United States and Canada. All of the essays included here were written expressly for this volume. Some derive from papers originally delivered at meetings of the Society (such as the 1971 Symposium on War Crimes and Moral Responsibility). All of the essays presented here attempt in different ways to reduce the moral and intellectual confusion that so often surrounds discussions of international conflict and international relations. When rationality and decency are absent, as they frequently are in international affairs, the rhetoric of justification may be present, but this will usually involve serious abuses of language and thought. In the attempt by all parties to corner the market in expressions of condemnation and exculpation, terms like “genocide,” “imperialism,” “self-determination,” “freedom,” “legitimacy,” “legality,” “honor,” “justice”—even “war” and “peace”—are bent and distorted. Offenses against language are offenses against thought and defenses against the uncomfortable costs of knowing what one is doing, having to acknowledge it to oneself, and knowing that others know as well. For philosophers this distortion of language is a natural target and the careful dissection and clarification of focal concepts occupy many of the contributors to this volume. But most of the essays do not limit themselves to attacking confusion brought about by the desire to manipulate or by self-deception. Some attempt to analyze terms and theories which have played important roles in social philosophy, legal discussion, and the social sciences. Others make specific proposals for international arrangements and institutions and suggest avenues for further empirical investigations. They are intended as reasoned challenges to widely held political beliefs and are written not merely to help us understand the political world but to suggest changes in it. It is a sad commentary on our situation that some of the essays have to defend the theses that morality and justice ought to play a role in international affairs and that prudence and national self-interest (no matter how defined) ought not to be the ultimate arbiters. It may have been blissful to have been young and philosophical at the dawn of the French Revolution. It is painful to write about international affairs in America now. The current situation reminds us that feelings of international fellowship are rare, that soldiers are willing to kill while their governments deceive, and that myopic self-regard and irrational pride and hatred have an even freer rein in international affairs than they do within national boundaries. The causal relevance of reason, to say nothing of philosophy, seems slight in international affairs. It seems pointless to detect three nonsequiturs and four evasions per dropped megaton. But the efficacy of reasoned criticism, even if slight, cannot be neglected. Rationalization and faulty moral argument, as well as the distortion of language, play a supportive role in the execution of policies even if they do not express the true motives for those policies. People wish to have a satisfactory conception of what they are doing, and if it is denied them the cost of persisting increases. So while it is often impossible to argue people out of a political commitment by showing that it rests on a mistake, it may be possible to undermine their comfort and leave them with fewer resources for representing themselves acceptably. Of course it is not only international terror and violence that are being objected to in these essays. There may be a decrease of violence and also a continuation of unjust international arrangements if the powerful nations impose a peace that is satisfactory to themselves alone. But unjust arrangements induce and possibly sometimes justify violence; hence the quest for peace is at one with the quest for justice. And the delineation of alternative courses of action, the suggestion of more reasonable forms of international behavior, must precede any conscious efforts to lower the level of international violence and horror. These essays, like many of the acts of protest against the war in Southeast Asia, are animated by the conviction that morality has a place in national conduct and international affairs, and they are guided by the experience that protest is not always futile. When people abdicate responsibility to those individuals and institutions with superior power, the door is open to terror and brutality. If, on the other hand, people commit themselves to seek sounder international arrangements, if they are encouraged to rely upon their own considered judgments and to act upon them, then just possibly we or our descendants may, after all, see the development of a humane and stable international order.
Publication Date
1974
Recommended Citation
Nagel, Thomas; Held, Virginia; and Morgenbesser, Sidney, "Philosophy, Morality, and International Affairs: Essays Edited for the Society for Philosophy and Public Affairs" (1974). Faculty Books & Edited Works. 984.
https://gretchen.law.nyu.edu/fac-books-edited-works/984
