|
|
This is only a preview of the paper
Click here to register and get the full text.
Existing members click here to login
|
|
|
` Violence is a widely debated topic. ... In the article, “ Violence, Terrorism, and Justice” the authors R. ... Morris discuss terrorism. ...
The authors first define terrorism. Terrorism is the use of violence to achieve either political or social goals. The following characteristics define terrorism: it designed to create terror, fear, or panic in a population, the use of it is usually arbitrary, non-combatants or “innocents” are often the target. ( Frey, 442)
The authors then go on to describe the debate between philosophers on whether terrorism is ever justified. The Act- Consequentialist perspective would condone terrorism but only if it maximized the well being of all those affected by an act of terrorism. ... The first consideration is is terrorism the most effective and efficient way to reach the social or political goal ? To figure this out the benefits of terrorism must be compared with other peaceful measures. ... The conclusion the authors make is that although it is theoretically possible to justify terrorism through consequentialist reasoning , it is “ only under conditions that terrorist in the flesh will find it difficult to satisfy”( Frey, 443). ... (Frey, 444)
The authors then go on to state the importance of the definition of innocence in the debate surrounding terrorism. While Kant’s moral theory condemns terrorism since it intentionally targets innocents, terrorist claim there victims are not really innocent. ... (Frey,445)
Then the authors go on to describe the similarity between nuclear war and terrorism.
Approximate Word count = 1110
Approximate Pages = 4.4
(250 words per page double spaced)
|
|
|
|
|
|