(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)
Polls taken in connection with the last US presidential election show that moral issues are becoming increasingly important when public opinion is to make political choices. Morality is put on the agenda because the powers that be speak about it and use it in their rhetoric. This has also become visible on the international level, especially in the various conflicts surrounding the war in Iraq and in particular on the fundamental question of whether it was right to go to war or not. But the US president can defend the war on terror with references to morality, while others may oppose this form of pursuing politics with exactly the same reference, making the concept feel thinner the more widespread. The debate in question rarely goes further than the contradiction between a moral universalism that defends absolute values and a moral relativism that justifies all ethical thinking with its anchoring in the various cultures. Therefore, the arguments bark at each other like water on a goose, and no one is particularly wiser.
The French method
Monique Canto-Sperber has a long career in moral philosophy. In addition to having translated and commented on a number of Plato's dialogues, she has written several books and been the editor of a "Dictionnaire d'éthique et de philosophie morale" which has gradually become an important reference for French philosophy students. Her current position is as research director at the Center Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique, and she is also a member of the French National Ethics Committee.
In other words, her background is classic in several ways, and it's not surprising that this is reflected in her latest book, Le bien, la guerre et la terror (The good, the war and the terror). The big advantage for those who master the French method to the degrees Canto-Sperber does is that it usually requires a good deal of knowledge at all to contradict her. For when a theory or a hypothesis is presented, it is without exception based on long lines of thought and a large number of footnotes. The disadvantage lies on the reader's side because it thus takes some time to get to the core of the issues. The author never lets himself get away with it, but carefully presents his measured views. That's why it's not always easy to see what she really is mener.
The place of morality
In this book, Monique Canto-Sperber attempts to define how much morality takes place in world politics, and then whether this place is legitimate. In this way, she will examine what moral and intellectual tools we have to understand the world we live in and to make it our space of action. Not particularly original, but naturally enough, the author takes as a starting point the changes the world has undergone, and is still undergoing, after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
Like most self-respecting French philosophers, she uses the first of three parts to define the basis for further reflection. Here she presents her philosophical issues by placing them in a historical context. According to Canto-Sperber, the reason why morale takes the position it has on the international stage lies in the weakening of the old Westphalian system. In the latter system, moral issues were reserved for the design of each individual nation-state, while international conditions could best be described in realpolitik terms. When this system is weakened, it is not just because each country is attributed less power as a direct result of a series of international agreements. The state of constant insecurity that international terrorism has brought with it also contributes to the fact that “we have gone from a world where the moral cognitions were confident and had indisputable references, to a world where the multiplication of dramatic events has created a stir of conflicting judgments. and brought uncertainty into the heart of values. ”
The character of morality
When questions are raised about moral principles that have previously been held to be universally valid, a need arises to defend them. With this realization, Canto-Sperber moves on to the second part of his reflection, which addresses the question of what kind of morality is best for the international community. In this section, where the author explores the boundaries between relative morality and absolute morality, she is at times very interesting, and – if it can be a compliment to a heavyweight – almost easy to read. This is especially true of the passages in which she criticizes the altar globalization movement for its "blue-eyed cosmopolitanism." The core of the criticism lies in the accusations that these new cosmopolitans will abolish the nation state in favor of popular rule, which according to Canto-Sperber can easily lead to tyranny. Here the question is whether she does not shoot sparrows with cannons, because if many critics of globalization can strongly disagree with the exercise of power by nation states, there is no broad consensus that the whole system should be abolished? If you put this on the account of accidental mistakes, her defense of the nation state is useful reading. According to the author, only the nation state can safeguard the rule of law and reduce violence to a minimum. This does not necessarily mean that a peaceful international society is impossible, but so far it is nothing more than an opportunity that lies ahead, and which until then will be characterized by conflict and competition between several models. In other words, in the current situation, it is each individual nation-state that best fulfills the role of guardian of morality.
No pacifist
Monique Canto-Sperber is not one of the most optimistic, and claims that we have a long way to go before all military intervention can end. Although she repeatedly disagrees with George W. Bush in his handling of the terrorist threat, she also points out that taking a completely pacifist attitude can in many cases prove immoral. Therefore, it is not just a morality that can decide whether or not it is right to go to war; we also need guidelines for moral warfare. This is the theme of the book's third and final part. The inspiration for much of the fabric is drawn from the questions raised in the debate over the Iraq war, and this makes the fabric feel relevant and important. As a textbook example, Canto-Sperber here links the philosophical challenges of war issues to specific events, and her vast knowledge makes you feel wiser for each section you read.
The road to hell…
The author's most interesting thoughts are on the dangers of letting morality override issues of war and peace. For when one's political goals are defined as moral, there are no longer any limits to what can be allowed to achieve it. The Iraq war is a clear example of this, as American forces with a moral goal in mind – to make Iraq a free and democratic country – do not let any obstacles stand in their way. If one is to disregard the fact that the Americans also have other and less ethical purposes in the Middle East (and Canto-Sperber thinks one can do well), the important fact remains that war with moral goals removes all possibility of morality i war.
The book is not available enough to reach the vast readership, but it has probably not been Monique Canto-Sperber's goal in this time either. On the other hand, it is all the more useful to those who are particularly interested, whether it be for the philosophy of morality, politics or philosophical methodology.
