Jihadists “Wrong Themselves” Morally: An Islamic-Aristotelian Interpretation

Abstract

Transnational terrorism qua “radical Islamism” presents questions pertinent to moral philosophy. Aristotelian ethics and Islamic ethics (ʿilm al-akhlāq) articulated comparatively by George Hourani are here engaged. Hourani questions whether “jihadists” are morally blameworthy in the Qurʾānic sense of “wronging themselves” (ẓalamtum anfusakum). The distinction is important because: (a) religious doctrines supposedly authorizing jihadist violence do not account for the distinction, even though (b) there is reason in Islamic ethics to do so. I then relate Hourani’s assessment to Ibn Rushd’s discussion of good and evil. I conclude that Hourani’s interpretation provides a reasonably defensible account enabling a moral evaluation of jihadist actions. This theoretical account integrating Aristotelian and Islamic ethics is illustrated by an example from recent police action in Bangladesh.