Sign In
Not register? Register Now!
Pages:
4 pages/≈1100 words
Sources:
2 Sources
Style:
MLA
Subject:
Literature & Language
Type:
Essay
Language:
English (U.S.)
Document:
MS Word
Date:
Total cost:
$ 14.4
Topic:

Philosophy 333, Natural Law, Fall 2015: The Atomic Bomb

Essay Instructions:

I need this paper to be a great grade, I scored a B on the last paper you wrote for me. Please follow the requirements noted on the file attached. For the end of the paper please take the stance that I believe the bombing was justified.

Philosophy 333: Natural Law                                                                                                                    Fall 2015

Third Paper Assignment

In August of 1945, in an effort to end the Second World War in the Pacific, the United States dropped two atomic bombs on Japan, one in Hiroshima and the other in Nagasaki.  The first bomb killed about 140,000 people, the vast majority civilians; the second bomb killed about 74,000 people.  The following excerpt is from a review by Andrew Roberts, a historian, of a recent book about the decision to drop the atomic bombs by Wilson Miscamble, also a historian, called The Most Controversial Decision, published in the Wall Street Journal (July 13, 2011).  It summarizes a number of common arguments in defense of the decision to drop the bombs:

“Most tellingly, the author reminds us of the hundreds of thousands of Japanese who had died in the conventional bombings of places like Tokyo and Kyoto while Roosevelt was president, but with relatively little opprobrium attaching to FDR. Father Miscamble cites as well the horrific massacre of innocents for which the Japanese were responsible [in China], a savagery still being unleashed in the summer of 1945, and the awful cost of battle in the Pacific, including 6,000 American dead and 20,000 wounded at Iwo Jima and 70,000 casualties suffered while capturing Okinawa. With these precedents, Herbert Hoover warned Truman that an invasion of the Japanese home islands could result in the loss of between half a million and a million American lives. Marshall, Leahy and Gen. Douglas MacArthur each had his own projected figures, none of them wildly different from Hoover's.

Under these circumstances, it was inconceivable that Truman would not have ordered the use of a potentially war-winning weapon the moment it could be deployed. It is impossible to imagine the depth of the public's fury if after the war Americans had discovered that their president, out of concern for his own conscience, had not used the weapons but instead condemned hundreds of thousands of American soldiers to certain death on the beaches and in the cities of mainland Japan.”

Questions:

1)      Was the dropping of the atomic bombs on Japan morally justified according to the natural law as explained by Aquinas?  Explain why or why not.

2)      How would Aquinas evaluate the specific reasons for the bombing given above?  What information about the bombing is most important for making a moral evaluation?

3)      Do you think the bombing was justified? (Note: this part of your paper should take up no more than one page out of a total of five to six pages.)

Cite passage from Aquinas according to their places in the Summa theologiae by part, question, and article, etc., e.g., 1-2, 5.3c = Prima secundae, question five, article 3, corpus; 1-2, 5.3 ad2 = the same, but the reply to objection two.  You needn’t cite any other sources, but if you do you must give full bibliographic data.    

Essay Sample Content Preview:
Name
Tutor
Course
Date
Natural Law and the Atomic Bomb
The dropping of the atomic bomb in Japan was not morally justifiable according the natural law as explained by Aquinas. Aquinas natural law explains that human beings have the right to free will but do not have the right to use the freewill to satisfy their own needs. Aquinas explains that God gave human beings the human nature for them to have the abilities to discern between what is good and what is bad (Aquinas , QQ34). The nature of human beings does not otherwise allow them to commit sins against fellow humans. Aquinas bases his argument on the theological commandment set in the days of Moses that “thou shalt not kill’ (Butler, 232).
It is natural for humans to feel that they have power over all other people that surround them, explaining the reason behind the bombings. There are certain things done that may seem fine in the eyes of human. Aquinas would not morally justify the situation since he feels that all human beings must be treated with respect and that would apply to respecting the life of a human being (Butler, 232). Killing, according to the philosophical statements made by Aquinas, means that the person takes the place of God and acts upon their own thoughts, which is an offence. The reason why there is a God is in order for him to take control over determining the kind of way he would want his people to live or die.
As insisted by Aquinas, the reason as to why the bombing would never be justified is the fact that that natural law commands that a person should take care of their own life in order to have the capability to take care of others. Aquinas therefore means that it is necessary that people live in harmony while watching out for each other. The application of the theological statement ‘You are your brother’s keeper” applies here (Aquinas, QQ 50). Aquinas in this case would argue that the morals of the people that bombed the place were low, but does not justify their actions in whatever sense.
The human nature of the people in this case was clouded by their natural inclinations towards doing what they felt would please them. The rules of natural law in this case may be misleading since they explain that ethics is not necessarily based on truth (Aquinas, QQ29). The statement therefore means that to some extent, the action may be morally justifiable if it was meant to redeem them of some unethical factor. The natural law by Aquinas from an overall point of view does not support the bombing since it is supportive of doing well to people. Aquinas states that God gave to us free will so we could have the choice to either do what is right or wrong.
How Aquinas Would Evaluate the Specific Reasons of the Bombing
The first and main reason for the bombing was in order to stop the Second World War in the main pacific. Aquinas would not support the overall judgment of the human beings as a country. The evaluation would begin from the root problem in order to know what exactly caused the Second World War along the pacific. Aquinas would use the theological commandments that deny people the right to act upon extremely evil plans based on the freewill aspect (Aquinas, QQ47)...
Updated on
Get the Whole Paper!
Not exactly what you need?
Do you need a custom essay? Order right now:

You Might Also Like Other Topics Related to world war 1: