道德应对还是简单简单的当兵?士兵如何通过简化、合理化、合理化和划分来避免道德伤害

T. Molendijk
{"title":"道德应对还是简单简单的当兵?士兵如何通过简化、合理化、合理化和划分来避免道德伤害","authors":"T. Molendijk","doi":"10.1177/0095327x231165910","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A substantial number of soldiers develop moral injuries, yet just as many do not. Therefore, it is important to explore the question: How do military service members generally interpret and cope with moral challenges related to their profession? This article analyzes the accounts of 80 (former) soldiers, examining how they perceived their profession and the coping strategies they tend to use in the face of moral challenges. The findings show that they generally did not experience as much moral tension as one might expect. Yet, when they did, they used coping strategies of simplification, justification, and rationalization, including doing good, rules and instructions, reciprocity, numbing, and compartmentalization. This leads to a middle position between the view that military personnel never experience moral challenges and the position that they find violence actually highly problematic, with important implications for research on moral injury, trauma, and soldiers’ experience.","PeriodicalId":130147,"journal":{"name":"Armed Forces & Society","volume":"531 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Moral Coping or Simply Uncomplicated Soldiering? How Soldiers Avoid Moral Injury Through Simplification, Justification, Rationalization, and Compartmentalization\",\"authors\":\"T. Molendijk\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0095327x231165910\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A substantial number of soldiers develop moral injuries, yet just as many do not. Therefore, it is important to explore the question: How do military service members generally interpret and cope with moral challenges related to their profession? This article analyzes the accounts of 80 (former) soldiers, examining how they perceived their profession and the coping strategies they tend to use in the face of moral challenges. The findings show that they generally did not experience as much moral tension as one might expect. Yet, when they did, they used coping strategies of simplification, justification, and rationalization, including doing good, rules and instructions, reciprocity, numbing, and compartmentalization. This leads to a middle position between the view that military personnel never experience moral challenges and the position that they find violence actually highly problematic, with important implications for research on moral injury, trauma, and soldiers’ experience.\",\"PeriodicalId\":130147,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Armed Forces & Society\",\"volume\":\"531 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Armed Forces & Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327x231165910\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Armed Forces & Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327x231165910","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

相当数量的士兵受到了道德上的伤害,但同样多的士兵没有受到伤害。因此,探讨这个问题是很重要的:军人一般如何解释和应对与他们的职业有关的道德挑战?本文分析了80名(前)士兵的故事,研究了他们如何看待自己的职业,以及他们在面对道德挑战时倾向于使用的应对策略。研究结果表明,他们通常没有像人们预期的那样经历那么多道德紧张。然而,当他们这样做时,他们使用简化、辩护和合理化的应对策略,包括做好事、规则和指示、互惠、麻木和划分。这导致了一种中间立场,即军人从未经历过道德挑战,而他们认为暴力实际上是非常有问题的,这对道德伤害、创伤和士兵经历的研究具有重要意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Moral Coping or Simply Uncomplicated Soldiering? How Soldiers Avoid Moral Injury Through Simplification, Justification, Rationalization, and Compartmentalization
A substantial number of soldiers develop moral injuries, yet just as many do not. Therefore, it is important to explore the question: How do military service members generally interpret and cope with moral challenges related to their profession? This article analyzes the accounts of 80 (former) soldiers, examining how they perceived their profession and the coping strategies they tend to use in the face of moral challenges. The findings show that they generally did not experience as much moral tension as one might expect. Yet, when they did, they used coping strategies of simplification, justification, and rationalization, including doing good, rules and instructions, reciprocity, numbing, and compartmentalization. This leads to a middle position between the view that military personnel never experience moral challenges and the position that they find violence actually highly problematic, with important implications for research on moral injury, trauma, and soldiers’ experience.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Risk Factors for Homelessness Among Post-9/11 Era Veterans Captain Mayor and Sergeant Councilman? An Assessment of the Reach of Military Politicization in Brazilian Politics The Science of Charles C. Moskos: From Institution to Occupation How Does Military Experience Affect Employment: Evidence From China Partners in Love/War: An Explorative Study of Ukrainian Soldiers’ Lived Experiences of Being in a Romantic Relationship in the Russo-Ukrainian War
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1