Abstract
This paper argues that James Turner Johnson's work models a particular form of practical reasoning: a kind of historical casuistry. This means that Johnson's contributions are not only descriptive, but normative in nature. Tracing this theme through various works, this article seeks to point to distinctions drawn by Johnson between his own model and those in which just war thinking is tied to one or more philosophically or theologically grounded principles. By way of concluding remarks, a brief assessment of Johnson's contributions to comparative studies of just war and jihad traditions will be offered.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
