A Contractualist Defense of Limited Moral Equality of Combatants

Bibliographic Data

ID22426495
AuthorsA Nguyen (0000-0002-1511-3089, Cornell University, corresponding author)
Year2026
Volume31
Issue4
Pages597-626
Publication date2026-07-15
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Ethics and Social Philosophy (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1559-3061 • E-ISSN: 1559-3061
PublisherJournal of Ethics and Social Philosophy (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.26556/jesp.v31i4.6244
OpenAlexW7168386730
LanguageEN
References cited47

I develop a novel contractualist defense of a limited moral equality of combatants thesis, on which just and unjust combatants enjoy equal moral status in some wars. This possibility reveals overlooked conceptual space for intermediary positions between orthodox just war theory and revisionism. I argue that following a limited moral equality of combatants thesis foreseeably protects both civilians’ and combatants’ strong interests in survival more robustly than alternative pacifist and revisionist principles. So such a thesis cannot be reasonably rejected. Contractualism therefore entails a limited moral equality of combatants thesis. In defending this thesis, I also address the concern that contractualism cannot be applied to just war theory due to the massive noncompliance inherent to warfare. I conclude by contrasting my contractualist approach with the recent contractarian one by Yitzhak Benbaji and Daniel Statman. I demonstrate that the contractualist approach avoids several counterexamples that plague Benbaji and Statman’s contractarian account.

Consequentialism · Contractualism · Ideal theory · Normative ethics · Political philosophy · Politics · Global Peace and Security Dynamics · Torture, Ethics, and Law · War, Ethics, and Justification

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access