"Supreme emergency" is a term that philosophers and scholars of war and peace give to situations where some think gross violence may be justified to protect people or values, or in circumstances where a great deal is at stake. But if one is willing to violate the same values that one is seeking to protect, is one engaged in a hypocritical and incoherent enterprise? Can violating a value (say, the prohibition against murder) to protect against (in this case) murder, be moral? Is it a matter of how many lives are at stake? How so?
One may think that such occasions as engender "supreme emergency" are incoherent and hypocritical. How can one murder in order to prevent murder? Would it then be justifiable for someone to murder you in order to prevent your murder of the murderer, ad infinitum? Ad absurdum? There is simply a logical contradiction.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The Answer of "Supreme emergency" is a term that philosophers and scholars of war and peace give to situations where some think gross violence may be justified to protect people or values, or in circumstances where a great deal is at stake. But if one is willing to violate the same values that one is seeking to protect, is one engaged in a hypocritical and incoherent enterprise? Can violating a value (say, the prohibition against murder) to protect against (in this case) murder, be moral? Is it a matter of how many lives are at stake? How so?
One may think that such occasions as engender "supreme emergency" are incoherent and hypocritical. How can one murder in order to prevent murder? Would it then be justifiable for someone to murder you in order to prevent your murder of the murderer, ad infinitum? Ad absurdum? There is simply a logical contradiction.

"Supreme Emergency" Is a Term That Philosophers and Scholars of War