|
|
Books > Philosophy > Topics in philosophy > Ethics & moral philosophy > General
Philosophical and ethical discussions of warfare are often tied to
emerging technologies and techniques. Today we are presented with
what many believe is a radical shift in the nature of war-the
realization of conflict in the cyber-realm, the so-called "fifth
domain " of warfare. Does an aggressive act in the cyber-realm
constitute an act of war? If so, what rules should govern such
warfare? Are the standard theories of just war capable of analyzing
and assessing this mode of conflict? These changing circumstances
present us with a series of questions demanding serious attention.
Is there such a thing as cyberwarfare? How do the existing rules of
engagement and theories from the just war tradition apply to
cyberwarfare? How should we assess a cyber-attack conducted by a
state agency against private enterprise and vice versa?
Furthermore, how should actors behave in the cyber-realm? Are there
ethical norms that can be applied to the cyber-realm? Are the
classic just war constraints of non-combatant immunity and
proportionality possible in this realm? Especially given the idea
that events that are constrained within the cyber-realm do not
directly physically harm anyone, what do traditional ethics of war
conventions say about this new space? These questions strike at the
very center of contemporary intellectual discussion over the ethics
of war. In twelve original essays, plus a foreword from John
Arquilla and an introduction, Binary Bullets: The Ethics of
Cyberwarfare, engages these questions head on with contributions
from the top scholars working in this field today.
Traditional moral theory usually has either of two emphases:
virtuous moral character or principles for distributing duties and
goods. Zone Morality introduces a third focus: families and
businesses are systems created by the causal reciprocities of their
members. These relations embody the duties and permissions of a
system's moral code. Core systems satisfy basic interests and
needs; we move easily among them hardly noticing that moral demands
vary from system to system. Moral conflicts arise because of
discord within or among systems but also because morality has three
competing sites: self-assertive, self-regarding people; the moral
codes of systems; and regulative principles that enhance social
cohesion. Each wants authority to control the other two. Their
struggles make governance fragile. A strong church or authoritarian
government reduces conflict by imposing its rules, but democracy
resists that solution. Procedural democracy is a default position.
Its laws and equitable procedures defend people or systems having
diverse interests when society fails to create a public that would
govern for the common interest.
|
|