The Justification of Religious Violence

Reviews / Votes

"How could anyone believe that they are justified in blowing up school busses or the World Trade Center? What role does religion play in their thinking? Steve Clarke illuminates these complex and controversial issues with clarity and balance. This important book is highly recommended for all of us who wonder about the relations between religion and violence." --Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Duke University "Avoiding big claims about religion causing violence, Steve Clarke argues that many religiously-based justifications for violence, far from being wildly irrational, are formally similar to those commonly offered as secular justifications. Clear, very readable, and thoroughly researched, the book makes a valuable contribution to one strand in the current debate about religion and violence." --C.A.J. Coady, University of Melbourne "The heated debates over the relation between religion and violence that burst onto the world's political and intellectual scene after 9/11 have spewed much foam and fury, but little fact or reason. Now, Stephen Clarke offers a sober yet humanistic analysis of how people justify violent acts in the name of religion, showing how historically and cross-culturally pervasive these justifications are. Mostly, secular and religious argument in support of violence proceeds much the same. The difference arises from three classes of premises that stem from religious metaphysics, and that transcend - and so resist contradiction by - empirical evidence and reason: appeal to cosmic war, the afterlife, sacred values, or some combination of these three. Religion thus outperforms the secular in arming violence, with conceptual resources both wider in scope and more resistant to challenge. Fortunately, Clarke also shows us how these same religious assets can be used to lessen violence and resolve even the most intractable conflicts: for example, through understanding and leveraging knowledge of sacred values, and learning how to reframe them, rather than by futilely trying to get opposing sides to ignore, abandon or compromise them." --Scott Atran, Directeur de Recherche, Anthropologie, CNRS / Ecole Normale Supérieure, Paris