All Is Fair in Love and War †Paper Essay

Love and fight atomic number 18 devil contrasting forces the former involves care and personal attachment while the latter involves brute force and destruction. They are also very similar in the sense that success in love and war flowerpot convey to the creation of happiness, relationship, devotion, liberty and freedom etc. all of which after part shape a persons or societies vitalitystyle. However, because of much(prenominal) tempting and important factors, in both love and war people cigaret live on so much focused and obsessed in their cause that they forget about their moral value and may even engage in malpractice to achieve their goals. Although such essence roll in the hay sometimes help them achieve their goals, I think these are not at all justified as they assume to the benefit of one at the loss of another, that is, they lead to selfless biasness, and according to Sen & Mitra (1956) can hinder the boilers suit peace and progress of a society. As such, I disag ree with the sentiment made by whoremaster Lyly in his book Euphues (1578) that all is fair in love and war.Justification of my claim can be proved by illustrating the criticisms of an respectable framework known as Machiavellianism. This concept is similar to the notion of thaumaturgy Lyly because it states that ends justify recollects. According to this concept, people can use any means, no issuance they are bad or immoral as long as it helps them accomplish their goal (which in this case is achieving success in love or war) by using them. I think such a pr overb is very much illogical. If we approve this, it would mean that even use of unfair means to achieve goals is justified under the circumstances similar to love and war. To illustrate for instance, in love this would mean the use of cheating, blackmailing, betrayal, stalking, and infighting. Similarly, in war it would also involve cheating, torture, kidnapping, bribery, fraud etc.All of these are un integrityful acts and as Richman (2012) points out, involves a cost, or more precisely a victim of the bodily function. Performers of such action and treat the victims as less than valet and as mere means to their ends. Their only justification for their action being that the benefits achieved are incommensurable. However, in doing so they forget the fact that such malpractices are all against the law which are made to secure enact and stability in the society. Thus, in this context supporting John Lylys claim would mean supporting illegal activities, instability and anarchy all of which would make human beings no less than animals. Therefore, these criticisms provides adequate defense for my claim.In addition to this, observing real life examples can also proves my claim. An obvious example is the violence being inflicted on women and minors in Bangladesh. Incidences such as trafficking, abuse, acid-attacks are a common scenario in this country. According to Unicef (2005) in that respect were 2 66 acid attacks reported in 2005 over a one year period, affecting 322 people1. Of these, 183 were women, 76 were children under 18, and 63 were men. Although, there were other reasons, a majority of the attacks can be directly or indirectly attributed to some sick form of non-white love, where the perpetrators used threat as a means of compelling the victim to accept their intention and upon being denied wanted their demise.Such justification of love is obviously not acceptable. Similarly, in case of war I think it seems illogical destroying hundreds of open lives just to kill a few enemy combatants, as in the case being undertaken in Afghanistan, Iran and other Arab countries. It is also not fair work as henchmen for enemies who are abusers of power. This is exactly what the Paramilitary force known as the Razakars did when they aided the Pakistan Army against the Mukti Bahini during the Bangladesh Liberation War. Their actions lead to the murder of around 300,000 to 500,000 pe ople at that time. As such, their means of winning the war was the killing of millions of innocent people, which can never be justified.There are however, drawbacks of my claim. An example can be abortion of a baby to save a mothers life. In such case, taking an innocent life is morally wrong, but saving the life of the women is morally adjust. As such, the point is, in all things there must be lines which should never be crossed, since if that happens, it would lead to destruction of order and control. But if the morally right outcome justifies the use of immoral means to achieve it, then such an action is justified.Therefore, in completion the notion All is fair in love and war is not always true. Application of ethical frameworks and examples clearly proves this, and so I firmly disagree with the idea. However, there are alternative ethical frameworks that can overcome the drawbacks this notion and my claim, one of which is Rights Theory. As Hohfelds (2001) points out, this the ory focuses on actions based on the key rights of the parties involved. It does this by setting up hierarchy of rights, where the highest order right includes rights to life, autonomy and human dignity. Second order rights involve the rights of the government, legal and civil rights. Third order rights involve the right to education, good healthcare and so on. As such, fulfillment the higher order rights take preference over the lower order rights and in this way ensuring proper justice and fairness for all.ReferenceSen, K. & Mitra, J.K. (1956) Commercial Law and Industrial Law. Kolkata, The Word fight back Private Ltd.Apperson, G. L. (2006) The Wordsworth dictionary of proverbs. Ware, Herts. Wordsworth ReferenceRichman, S. (2012). Do Ends Justify Means? (ONLINE) Available at http//www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/do-ends-justify-means. (Accessed 27 January 13).Rainbolt, G. W. (2006) Rights Theory. Philosophy Compass 1, ET 003, 111.BBC. (2012). Bangladesh Islamist leader Ghulam Aza m charged. (ONLINE) Available at http//www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-18049515. (Accessed 27 January 13)UNICEF. (2005) Women and Girls in Bangladesh. advocate to the Acid Survivors Foundation and the Kishori Abhijan Project in Bangladesh. 1