Can Terrorism Ever Be Morally Justified?

IF 1.4 4区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Society Pub Date : 2024-02-29 DOI:10.1007/s12115-024-00975-9
Quassim Cassam
{"title":"Can Terrorism Ever Be Morally Justified?","authors":"Quassim Cassam","doi":"10.1007/s12115-024-00975-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper provides a framework to make moral sense of terrorism. The framework consists in a test, referred to as the MODAL test, which is an acronym standing for five tests or principles for determining the moral defensibility or indefensibility of terrorism. The five principles concern the motives for terrorism, its objectives, destructiveness, availability of alternatives, and likelihood of success. This approach makes it conceivable but highly unlikely in practice that a terrorist act is morally justified. The MODAL test does not claim to be an exhaustive framework for analysing the moral legitimacy or illegitimacy of terrorism but rather a practical analytical tool aimed at securing a reliable grasp of the tricky question of the relation between morality and terrorism.</p>","PeriodicalId":47267,"journal":{"name":"Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12115-024-00975-9","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper provides a framework to make moral sense of terrorism. The framework consists in a test, referred to as the MODAL test, which is an acronym standing for five tests or principles for determining the moral defensibility or indefensibility of terrorism. The five principles concern the motives for terrorism, its objectives, destructiveness, availability of alternatives, and likelihood of success. This approach makes it conceivable but highly unlikely in practice that a terrorist act is morally justified. The MODAL test does not claim to be an exhaustive framework for analysing the moral legitimacy or illegitimacy of terrorism but rather a practical analytical tool aimed at securing a reliable grasp of the tricky question of the relation between morality and terrorism.

恐怖主义在道义上有正当理由吗?
本文提供了一个从道德角度认识恐怖主义的框架。该框架包括一个测试,称为 "MODAL 测试",它是五个测试或原则的首字母缩写,用于确定恐怖主义在道义上的可辩护性或不可辩护性。这五项原则涉及恐怖主义的动机、目标、破坏性、替代办法的可用性和成功的可能性。这种方法使恐怖主义行为在道义上是合理的成为可能,但在实践中却极不可能。MODAL 检验法并不是分析恐怖主义道德正当性或非法性的详尽无遗的框架,而是一种实用的分析工具,旨在确保可靠地把握道德与恐怖主义之间关系这一棘手的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Society
Society Multiple-
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
11.10%
发文量
132
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Founded in 1962, Society enjoys a wide reputation as a journal that publishes the latest scholarship on the central questions of contemporary society. It produces six issues a year offering new ideas and quality research in the social sciences and humanities in a clear, accessible style. Society sees itself as occupying the vital center in intellectual and political debate. Put negatively, this means the journal is opposed to all forms of dogmatism, absolutism, ideological uniformity, and facile relativism. More positively, it seeks to champion genuine diversity of opinion and a recognition of the complexity of the world''s issues. Society includes full-length research articles, commentaries, discussion pieces, and book reviews which critically examine work conducted in the social sciences as well as the humanities. The journal is of interest to scholars and researchers who work in these broadly-based fields of enquiry and those who conduct research in neighboring intellectual domains. Society is also of interest to non-specialists who are keen to understand the latest developments in such subjects as sociology, history, political science, social anthropology, philosophy, economics, and psychology. The journal’s interdisciplinary approach is reflected in the variety of esteemed thinkers who have contributed to Society since its inception. Contributors have included Simone de Beauvoir, Robert K Merton, James Q. Wilson, Margaret Mead, Abraham Maslow, Richard Hoggart, William Julius Wilson, Arlie Hochschild, Alvin Gouldner, Orlando Patterson, Katherine S. Newman, Patrick Moynihan, Claude Levi-Strauss, Hans Morgenthau, David Riesman, Amitai Etzioni and many other eminent thought leaders. The success of the journal rests on attracting authors who combine originality of thought and lucidity of expression. In that spirit, Society is keen to publish both established and new authors who have something significant to say about the important issues of our time.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信