Collectivist defenses of the moral equality of combatants

Abstract

This article examines the view that the doctrine of the moral equality of combatants can be defended by appeal to a collectivist understanding of war, according to which individual combatants on both sides act not in their capacity as individuals but as agents of their collective. I argue that the collectivist argument fails and, moreover, cannot be salvaged by an appeal to the epistemic limitations under which combatants must usually act. Considerations of moral risk in fact suggest that epistemic limitations militate in favor of refusal rather than obedience.