letters | at the heart of terrorism

Delving into a problem doesn’t mean we justify it

While Jeff Jacoby is right in his view of knee-jerk responses to terrorism that reflexively blame America, he is undoubtedly wrong in endorsing knee-jerk responses that reflexively denounce the perpetrators on moral grounds and do nothing more (“Terrorism is never justified,” Op-ed, May 15). Of course it’s evil to set off a bomb in a crowd, but does that mean we shouldn’t ask “why the evildoers hate us, or how they became so angry”?

Trying to understand a problem is not the same thing as justification. Oncologists don’t endorse cancer, nor do criminologists endorse crime. They merely feel, as a practical matter, that we need to know precisely what we are dealing with in order to fashion an effective response.


We need to know a lot more than we do now about how and why these acts occur, and careful study is the only path open to us in providing that knowledge.

Kathleen Martin


Loading comments...
Real journalists. Real journalism. Subscribe to The Boston Globe today.