Abstract
<p>This essay examines the debate over moral justifications of state terrorism. Consequentialist and deontologist perspectives provide a framework to justify acts of terrorism. However, this framework can not absolutely be defended. By drawing on Tony Coady and Igor Primoratz point of views, it is argued that acts of terrorism perpetrated by the state can never be justified and it is morally wrong and worse than non-state terrorism.</p><p> </p><p><strong>Keywords :</strong> state terrorism, moral justification, consequentialist, deontologist</p>
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.
