David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Social Theory and Practice 34 (2):209-242 (2008)
Terrorism is commonly viewed as a form of war, and as a form of war, the morality of terrorism seems to turn on the usual arguments regarding the furtherance of political objectives through coercive means. The terrorist argues that his options for armed struggle are limited, and that the use of force against civilians is the only way he can advance his cause. But this argument is subject to a powerful response. There is the argument from consequences, which asserts that terrorism is almost always counterproductive, even assuming the terrorist’s political objectives are legitimate. There is the argument from rights, which claims that terrorism violates the basic human rights of (at least) its civilian victims, and is therefore morally objectionable regardless of its consequences. And there is the argument from virtue, which notes that slaughtering civilians requires no skill or courage and therefore generates no honor or glory, making the terrorist not a virtuous warrior but a vicious one. But terrorism is not only a means of political coercion. It is also, in the view of many terrorists, a means of retribution. It is a means of exacting punishment on a political community the terrorist believes is collectively responsible for grievous wrongs certain members of that community have committed. And viewed as a means of retribution, the usual arguments made against terrorism-as-coercion have no moral force. To explain why terrorism-as-retribution is morally wrong, we must attack the notion of collective responsibility on which the terrorist relies
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Claudia Card (2003). Questions Regarding a War on Terrorism. Hypatia 18 (1):164 - 169.
Whitley R. P. Kaufman (2004). Terrorism, Self-Defense, and the Killing of the Innocent. Social Philosophy Today 20:41-52.
Virginia Held (2004). Terrorism and War. Journal of Ethics 8 (1):59-75.
Anne Schwenkenbecher (2010). Terrorism Against Non-Innocents: The Ethical Implications. In Paul Omoyefa (ed.), Basic Applied Ethics. VDM.
Nicholas Maxwell (2007). The Disastrous War Against Terrorism: Violence Versus Enlightenment. In Albert W. Merkidze (ed.), Terrorism Issues: Threat Assessment , Consequences and Prevention.
Seumas Miller (2006). On Terrorism and Lost Rationality. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 20 (1):173-176.
Alistair M. Macleod (2004). Terrorism and the Root Causes Argument. Social Philosophy Today 20:97-108.
Seumas Miller (2004). Terrorism and Collective Responsibility. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 18 (2):263-281.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads41 ( #34,894 of 1,088,785 )
Recent downloads (6 months)7 ( #15,213 of 1,088,785 )
How can I increase my downloads?