this aspect of behaviour, whereas Jains and some Buddhists regard any negative verbal response as a form of violence, and therefore do not permit it. Finally, the third dimension of the new typology defines the level of physical response which is permitted, and so I describe this axis as“ kinematic”. It includes possibilities such as raising an arm in defence, or“ turning the other cheek” in the literal sense.
For the next stage in my argument I will consider only the biotaxonomic scale in further detail. What I will demonstrate is that all points on this scale entail definitions that can be expressed in a form which uses the word“ except”; by definition, this cannot be true of literally absolute pacifism. The problem regarding absolute pacifism becomes apparent when one tries to find a limiting point regarding the threshold on each scale. In the case of the biotaxonomic dimension, it might reasonably be thought that“ life” as a threshold was exactly this point, but there are two problems with this idea. Firstly, if all living things must be protected from a resistant response, then one would have to suppress one ' s own immune system, as knowing it to be present and failing to do so would be negligent. Secondly, the concept of life is surprisingly hard to define, with viruses being an excellent example of the difficulty: according to one definition, they are a form of life, but by another,
22, 23 they are not. Further examples are illustrative: the devout Jainist adopts the definition of“ absolute” pacifism which involves“ except insects and still smaller creatures which I failed to sweep away, despite my good intentions” – isomorphic in structure( though not degree!) with the military’ s approach to minimising“ collateral damage”. Similarly, even the strictest pacifist eats vegetables, effectively adopting a definition involving“ except killing plants” – analogous to the wartime maxim of“ kill or be killed”, but in this context with the intention of avoiding death by starvation. Regarding one’ s immune system, ignoring this aspect is to allow a definition such as“ except the consequences of autonomous lethal systems which predate my involvement”.
These examples demonstrate that, although increasingly restrictive forms of pacifism can be imagined, and even in some surprisingly extreme cases already exist, no truly absolute form appears possible. All forms of pacifism which are called absolute are wrongly described in this manner – a better term would be extreme
22 Daniel E. Koshland Jr.,“ The Seven Pillars of Life,” Science 295( 2002): 2215-2216. 23 Erwin Schrödinger, What Is Life? The Physical Aspect of the Living Cell( Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1944), 91.
��