恐怖与利维坦:争议解决中的认知、折磨与话语

IF 0.5 3区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Y. Barilan
{"title":"恐怖与利维坦:争议解决中的认知、折磨与话语","authors":"Y. Barilan","doi":"10.1075/PC.23.3.08BAR","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article surveys the history of “terror” vis a vis the development of international humanitarian and human rights law. During the French Revolution, the word “terror” was coined to describe a deviation from the laws of war. Justified by a mixture of ideology and necessity. People who resort to terrorism either suspends or rejects the laws of war ( jus in bellum ) in the name of an alternative and heightened sense of truth. However, the terrorists’ strong sense of probity and mission is also an opening for re-establishing communication, arbitration and mitigation of cruelty and destruction. This paper represents International Humanitarian Law (IHL) as an “abstract Leviathan”, submission to which is the contemporary norm of pacification. From the perspective of radical terrorism, it is tyrannical. From other perspectives, it is open to criticism and change. Most importantly, it is on the side of rational arbitration rather than arbitrary ordeal. Even radical terrorism, which refuses to recognize the legitimacy of the abstract Leviathan, seeks to communicate its radical messages rather than to seek victory my means of physical annihilation of its opponents.","PeriodicalId":45741,"journal":{"name":"Pragmatics & Cognition","volume":"17 1","pages":"461-471"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1075/PC.23.3.08BAR","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Terror and the Leviathan: Recognition, ordeal and discourse in dispute resolution\",\"authors\":\"Y. Barilan\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/PC.23.3.08BAR\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article surveys the history of “terror” vis a vis the development of international humanitarian and human rights law. During the French Revolution, the word “terror” was coined to describe a deviation from the laws of war. Justified by a mixture of ideology and necessity. People who resort to terrorism either suspends or rejects the laws of war ( jus in bellum ) in the name of an alternative and heightened sense of truth. However, the terrorists’ strong sense of probity and mission is also an opening for re-establishing communication, arbitration and mitigation of cruelty and destruction. This paper represents International Humanitarian Law (IHL) as an “abstract Leviathan”, submission to which is the contemporary norm of pacification. From the perspective of radical terrorism, it is tyrannical. From other perspectives, it is open to criticism and change. Most importantly, it is on the side of rational arbitration rather than arbitrary ordeal. Even radical terrorism, which refuses to recognize the legitimacy of the abstract Leviathan, seeks to communicate its radical messages rather than to seek victory my means of physical annihilation of its opponents.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45741,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pragmatics & Cognition\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"461-471\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1075/PC.23.3.08BAR\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pragmatics & Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/PC.23.3.08BAR\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pragmatics & Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/PC.23.3.08BAR","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

本文从国际人道主义法和人权法的发展角度考察了“恐怖”的历史。在法国大革命期间,“恐怖”一词被用来描述对战争法的偏离。被意识形态和必要性的混合证明是合理的。诉诸恐怖主义的人要么以另一种选择和更高的真理感的名义暂停或拒绝战争法(战争法)。然而,恐怖分子强烈的正义感和使命感也为重新建立沟通、仲裁和减轻残酷和破坏提供了机会。本文将国际人道法描述为一个“抽象的利维坦”,对它的服从是当代的和平规范。从激进恐怖主义的角度来看,它是专制的。从其他角度来看,它对批评和改变是开放的。最重要的是,它站在理性仲裁的一边,而不是武断的折磨。即使是激进的恐怖主义,它拒绝承认抽象的利维坦的合法性,也寻求传达其激进的信息,而不是通过物理消灭对手来寻求胜利。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Terror and the Leviathan: Recognition, ordeal and discourse in dispute resolution
The article surveys the history of “terror” vis a vis the development of international humanitarian and human rights law. During the French Revolution, the word “terror” was coined to describe a deviation from the laws of war. Justified by a mixture of ideology and necessity. People who resort to terrorism either suspends or rejects the laws of war ( jus in bellum ) in the name of an alternative and heightened sense of truth. However, the terrorists’ strong sense of probity and mission is also an opening for re-establishing communication, arbitration and mitigation of cruelty and destruction. This paper represents International Humanitarian Law (IHL) as an “abstract Leviathan”, submission to which is the contemporary norm of pacification. From the perspective of radical terrorism, it is tyrannical. From other perspectives, it is open to criticism and change. Most importantly, it is on the side of rational arbitration rather than arbitrary ordeal. Even radical terrorism, which refuses to recognize the legitimacy of the abstract Leviathan, seeks to communicate its radical messages rather than to seek victory my means of physical annihilation of its opponents.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
×
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