I have started into Ross King's acclaimed book Leonardo and The Last Supper which is about the painting by Leonardo Da Vinci which has Jesus and his disciples at table together for its subject.
King sets the stage for the era by describing the invasion of Italy by the French king, Charles VIII. The French army had a significant advantage because of its artillery. The French cannons fired large iron cannon balls rather than the small stones of the Italians. The artillerymen of the French were trained specifically for their task, which was unprecedented, and they could fire off rounds with precision and speed.
Where am I going with this? To the military robots and drones of the 21st century. Over the past couple of weeks the US president, Barack Obama, has addressed the ethical issues of using unmanned drone aircraft --essentially robots that fly -- to strike a perceived enemy, including American citizens living in other lands who may be part of terrorist organizations. Meanwhile the United Nations has debated the use of robots in combat and the implications of this new military technology.
This is all part of a long history of seeking military advantage, and while the United States certainly has the ability and desire to develop these sophisticated weapons we would be naïve to think that other nations such as China don't or won't do the same.
Where does the notion of "Just War" come into this? This is a theological concept which is more than a thousand years old, and offers that even military conflicts must have ethical boundaries. In the Christian tradition we associate Just War with Augustine and Thomas Aquinas. How do we apply some of the principles of Just War to the sophisticated technology of our day?
It is tempting to say that warfare which eliminates risk for "good guy" combatants is an advancement, but who determines the good guy, not to mention the target? Little wonder that I haven't seen responses from religious ethicists yet, although they may be commenting and I just haven't noticed.
Pondering all this makes my head hurt! How about you? Had you been aware of these debates? Is it important for religious groups to respond?
2 comments:
It's an interesting debate on a number of fronts, and I think any voices that breathe the moral implications back into it should be welcomed.
It would be interesting to see what would happen to health care and education (to say nothing of national budget deficits and their debt) if the Americans took the funds designated for military procurement and development and redirected them to any of those areas for, say, five years.
Thanks for responding where angels and others fear to tread Ian. I agree with you about the warped spending priorities.
Post a Comment