John Kelsay

Responsibility and moral reasoning: A study in Business Ethics

This essay was written for the 1984 General Motors Intercollegiate Business Understanding Program. It consists of three sections, each responding to a separate issue posed by General Motors. The opinions expressed are not those of the General Motors management.The first section attempts to document, through the use of Harvard Business Review articles, a shift in the notion of managerial responsibility from a narrowly focused role responsibility to a more widely focused moral responsibility.The second section explicates the different conceptions of Justice behind the United States and West German economic systems. It gives examples of the consequences of the different conceptions both in methods of policy formation and results.The third section deals with business ethics in international contexts. It argues that law is by itself inadequate in the regulation of business activity and must be supplemented by public discussion, which employs the traditional methods of moral reasoning.

James Turner Johnson, Just War Tradition, and Forms of Practical Reasoning

Abstract This paper argues that James Turner Johnsons work models a particular form of practical reasoning: a kind of historical casuistry. This means that Johnsons contributions are not only descriptive, but normative in nature. Tracing this theme through various works, this article seeks to point to distinctions drawn by Johnson between his own model and those in which just war thinking is tied to one or more philosophically or theologically grounded principles. By way of concluding remarks, a brief assessment of Johnsons contributions to comparative studies of just war and jihad traditions will be offered.

Just War Thinking as a Social Practice

The abstract for the International Studies Association panel that gave rise to this special section of Ethics & International Affairs referred to the “triumph” of just war theory. However, I think we ought rather to speak of just war discourse as occupying a particular niche. This is especially so with respect to discussions about policy: when and where governments should make use of military force, what type, and so on. In that context, appeals to the criteria of jus ad bellum and jus in bello complement (or sometimes compete with) thinking that draws on international law, various strategic doctrines (for example, counterinsurgency warfare, or COIN), notions of reciprocity between states, and a host of other considerations. The notion of “triumph” claims too much. At the same time, for advocates of the just war framework, the kind of recognition indicated by presidential and other official mentions of the idea is worthy of note. Some of these are due to constituency politics—that is, to the idea that “institutional” advocates of just war (say, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops) may influence blocs of voters. Other invocations are better interpreted as a recognition that the vocabulary of just war can serve (along with other ways of speaking) in the attempt to craft wise policy.

Nigel Biggar’s In Defence of War: A Review Essay

Let us begin with a scene from Steven Spielberg’s production of Lincoln. Here, the President is speaking with Thaddeus Stevens, leader of the Radical Republicans in the Congress, and a severe critic of the President’s deliberative approach to the abolition of slavery. Having established the abolitionist argument through an appeal to a higher, natural law, Stevens suggests there is little sense in trying to bring others along:

The Just War Argument in Islam (Who’s Up? Who’s Down?)

The relationship between the rule of law and the rule of God has never been simple. This is so in part because of the way the latter lays claim to the former. For any community in which the rule of God implies obedience to divine directives—or, to put it another way, in which the ultimate standard of righteousness is connected with God’s law—the divine standard constitutes a measure against which any human claims may be evaluated.

Muslim Discourse on Rebellion

We can begin with a story. In his account of the reign of Harun al-Rashid, al-Tabari spends considerable time on the matter of Yahya ibn Abdallah. Scion of the family of ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, Yahya was the leader of a group active in Daylam, a region in present-day Iran. Al-Rashid and other Abbasid leaders laid claim to the territory, but at the time (the 790s) they did not have effective control over it. Ever-sensitive to the challenge presented by sentiment favoring the house of ‘Ali, al-Rashid and his advisers devised a scheme by which the ruler of Daylam received payment for persuading Yahya to turn himself in. He did so, but only on the condition that al-Rashid provide him with a written aman , or guarantee of security.

Islam and the Study of Ethics

Abstract Aaron Hughes’ critique of certain trends in Islamic Studies raises some important questions. The force of the critique rests on limiting the sample of material, however. I suggest we broaden the selection of scholarly work to include studies focused on questions of ethics, understood as the study of normative discourse. A number of articles published in the Journal of Religious Ethics provide an illustration of an alternative approach to the study of Islam, and suggest a more hopeful picture than the one provided by Hughes.

Islamist Movements and Shari‘a Reasoning

Abstract Islamist appeals to the authority of al‐shari‘a, one of the primary referents for practical judgment in Muslim tradition, present scholars with a significant challenge. Attention to such appeals helps in the identifications of the Islamists’ political goals. As well, such appeals point to the deep historical roots of the Islamist programme. Yet Islamists make a number of innovations in shari‘a reasoning, even as they appeal to its authority. This is particularly so with respect to judgments related to the conduct of war. This contradiction suggests an important weakness in the intellectual aspect of the Islamist programme, to which scholars and policymakers ought to attend.

Islam and Medical Ethics

Is there a distinctively Islamic approach to medical ethics? Given recent trends in Islamic thought, one might expect a positive answer. Everywhere one turns, Muslims speak for particularity: politically, for an Islamic government; economically, for an Islamic alternative to socialism and capitalism. Similarly, the Islamic Code of Medical Ethics promulgated in Kuwait in 1981 by the First International Conference on Islamic Medicine asserts that the Muslim Medical Profession should be conversant with Islam’s teachings and abide by them. It should also thoroughly study at first hand the data, facts, figures and projections of various parameters actually existent in Muslim societies. Upon this should be decided what to take and what to reject from the experiences and conclusions of other societies. Reconciliation with a policy of uncritical copying of alien experience should be stopped ([4], p. 73/77).1

Biggar’s Critique of Christian Pacifism, Extended

In this essay, I take up the critique of Christian pacifism offered in Nigel Biggar’s In Defence of War. 1 Focusing on the New Testament, Biggar argues that the evidence does not suggest a requirement of pacifism for Christians. This seems correct, but I argue that Biggar’s critique should be extended through an engagement with the Old Testament and other sources that inform Christian practical reason.