Reading Contemporary American Warfare with Just War Theory

IF 0.1 3区 文学 0 LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM
T. Hawkins, Andrew Kim
{"title":"Reading Contemporary American Warfare with Just War Theory","authors":"T. Hawkins, Andrew Kim","doi":"10.1080/10436928.2023.2209497","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In late 2021, we published a coauthored book with Palgrave Macmillan’s American Literature Readings in the Twenty-first Century series called, Just War Theory and Literary Studies: An Invitation to Dialogue. This text is the culmination of years of thinking on our parts, both individually and jointly, about the relationship between warfare, ethics, aesthetics, cultural memory, and American national identity. Myriad concerns—or more to the point, frustrations—animate our work on this project. Both of us, but Hawkins in particular, believe that much of today’s worthy scholarly reflection about the human experience, and the human costs, of modern and contemporary conflict occurs under the auspices of humanities disciplines wherein scholars actively work through representations of warfare to arrive at ethical claims about warfare. At the same time, many of these scholars, lacking systematic education in ethics proper, appear confused about the first principles on which their axiological claims rest, to say nothing about the habits of thought and action the effectuation of said principles might demand. As a result, we believe that much of today’s humanistic research on war would benefit greatly from direct conversation with scholarship from those disciplines in which the ethics of warring are engaged systematically—namely, philosophy and theology. At the same time, as Kim proves keen to note, conversations about warfare and ethics from within philosophy and theology frequently play out in manners so far removed from what we term the “acting person” in our book as to seem “academic” in the worst sense (3). In fact, much of the work currently being published in philosophy and theology on Just War Theory (JWT), as well as work which engages alternative approaches to questions of warfare and ethics, is virtually unreadable not only from outside those disciplines but even from outside certain of their niche sub-disciplines. Thus, it is our further belief that philosophical and theological reflections on justice and warfare would benefit from direct engagement with scholars whose work on war and ethics principally engages texts that center lived human experience. Given these twinned contestations, we wrote Just War Theory and Literary Studies to an interdisciplinary audience of scholars and students, in hopes of achieving","PeriodicalId":42717,"journal":{"name":"LIT-Literature Interpretation Theory","volume":"34 1","pages":"1 - 6"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LIT-Literature Interpretation Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10436928.2023.2209497","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In late 2021, we published a coauthored book with Palgrave Macmillan’s American Literature Readings in the Twenty-first Century series called, Just War Theory and Literary Studies: An Invitation to Dialogue. This text is the culmination of years of thinking on our parts, both individually and jointly, about the relationship between warfare, ethics, aesthetics, cultural memory, and American national identity. Myriad concerns—or more to the point, frustrations—animate our work on this project. Both of us, but Hawkins in particular, believe that much of today’s worthy scholarly reflection about the human experience, and the human costs, of modern and contemporary conflict occurs under the auspices of humanities disciplines wherein scholars actively work through representations of warfare to arrive at ethical claims about warfare. At the same time, many of these scholars, lacking systematic education in ethics proper, appear confused about the first principles on which their axiological claims rest, to say nothing about the habits of thought and action the effectuation of said principles might demand. As a result, we believe that much of today’s humanistic research on war would benefit greatly from direct conversation with scholarship from those disciplines in which the ethics of warring are engaged systematically—namely, philosophy and theology. At the same time, as Kim proves keen to note, conversations about warfare and ethics from within philosophy and theology frequently play out in manners so far removed from what we term the “acting person” in our book as to seem “academic” in the worst sense (3). In fact, much of the work currently being published in philosophy and theology on Just War Theory (JWT), as well as work which engages alternative approaches to questions of warfare and ethics, is virtually unreadable not only from outside those disciplines but even from outside certain of their niche sub-disciplines. Thus, it is our further belief that philosophical and theological reflections on justice and warfare would benefit from direct engagement with scholars whose work on war and ethics principally engages texts that center lived human experience. Given these twinned contestations, we wrote Just War Theory and Literary Studies to an interdisciplinary audience of scholars and students, in hopes of achieving
用正义战争理论解读当代美国战争
在2021年末,我们与帕尔格雷夫·麦克米伦的《21世纪美国文学读物》系列合著了一本名为《正义战争理论与文学研究:对话邀请》的书。这篇文章是我们多年来对战争、伦理、美学、文化记忆和美国民族认同之间关系的思考的结晶。无数的担忧——或者更确切地说,挫折——激励着我们在这个项目上的工作。我们两个人,尤其是霍金斯,都相信,今天许多关于人类经历和人类代价的有价值的学术反思,都是在人文学科的支持下进行的,在人文学科中,学者们积极地通过战争的表现来得出关于战争的伦理主张。与此同时,这些学者中的许多人,由于缺乏适当的系统的伦理学教育,似乎对他们的价值论主张所依据的首要原则感到困惑,更不用说实现这些原则所需要的思想和行动习惯了。因此,我们相信,今天关于战争的人文主义研究将从与那些系统地研究战争伦理的学科(即哲学和神学)的学者直接对话中受益匪浅。与此同时,正如Kim热衷于指出的那样,哲学和神学内部关于战争和伦理的对话经常以一种与我们在书中所说的“行动者”相距甚远的方式进行,在最坏的意义上似乎是“学术性的”(3)。事实上,目前在哲学和神学上发表的关于正义战争理论(JWT)的许多工作,以及采用其他方法来解决战争和伦理问题的工作,不仅在这些学科之外,甚至在他们的特定子学科之外,实际上都是不可读的。因此,我们进一步相信,对正义和战争的哲学和神学反思将受益于与学者的直接接触,他们在战争和伦理方面的工作主要涉及以人类生活经验为中心的文本。鉴于这些双重的争论,我们写了《正义战争理论和文学研究》给跨学科的学者和学生,希望能达到
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
LIT-Literature Interpretation Theory
LIT-Literature Interpretation Theory LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM-
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信