5 ms·

Doesn't it depends on the context? Defending an elderly from assault or protecting one's family from a reckless person is violence in the name of virtue.

xgb84j 5y ago
While violence is sometimes justified, I think it's still better to build a society that tries to solve its problems without violence or prevents problems that can only be solved with violence. When you have reckless people attacking the elderly you need better psychological healthcare and a better social system to prevent that. I understand your point and in a narrow context it's definitely true, but in a larger context you can prevent most violence by changing society.
- refurb 5y ago
  What about the people that are violent, not because of mental illness, but because well, they want to cause others pain?
  - Applejinx 5y ago
    Rule of law and systemic governance will always be more practical to manage this, than dependence on heroic vigilante justice to meet an evil individual with a heroic individual, on the spot and ready to act. There's a variety of reasons for this, but one of 'em is that in a condition of systemic governance, there's some societal pressure against the kind of sadism you mention. In a world like Sparta, it's hard to tell the heroes from the villains, and anybody might lash out at any time. Even the quotes given, spell out situations where random violence was just a part of everyday, expected life. This causes tensions and grudges.
  - xgb84j 5y ago
    Many of these people are heavily traumatized. Charles Manson for example was mistreated by his mother and in prison. If there were better child protective services and a more humane prison system in place, he might never have done what he did. Most people doing evil things are in part doing these evil things as a result of their circumstances. By changing their circumstances through social programs you reduce violence and make everyone happier as a result. You can argue that blaming violence on circumstances ignores people's own responsibility, but I believe that better social and medical programs are still worth it because they attack the part of the root cause society can influence most easily.
    - refurb 5y ago
      What about the people who just like hurting other people?
- int_19h 5y ago
  I think we need to distinguish between violence and capacity for violence. Yes, we should strive towards a society that tries to solve its problems without violence as much as possible. But new problems appear every now and then, and not all of them can be solved without violence, unfortunately. So we still have to be able to resort to it when needed. Something like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pLb_uc0bo8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pLb_uc0bo8

xgb84j 5y ago

While violence is sometimes justified, I think it's still better to build a society that tries to solve its problems without violence or prevents problems that can only be solved with violence. When you have reckless people attacking the elderly you need better psychological healthcare and a better social system to prevent that. I understand your point and in a narrow context it's definitely true, but in a larger context you can prevent most violence by changing society.

refurb 5y ago
What about the people that are violent, not because of mental illness, but because well, they want to cause others pain?
- Applejinx 5y ago
  Rule of law and systemic governance will always be more practical to manage this, than dependence on heroic vigilante justice to meet an evil individual with a heroic individual, on the spot and ready to act. There's a variety of reasons for this, but one of 'em is that in a condition of systemic governance, there's some societal pressure against the kind of sadism you mention. In a world like Sparta, it's hard to tell the heroes from the villains, and anybody might lash out at any time. Even the quotes given, spell out situations where random violence was just a part of everyday, expected life. This causes tensions and grudges.
- xgb84j 5y ago
  Many of these people are heavily traumatized. Charles Manson for example was mistreated by his mother and in prison. If there were better child protective services and a more humane prison system in place, he might never have done what he did. Most people doing evil things are in part doing these evil things as a result of their circumstances. By changing their circumstances through social programs you reduce violence and make everyone happier as a result. You can argue that blaming violence on circumstances ignores people's own responsibility, but I believe that better social and medical programs are still worth it because they attack the part of the root cause society can influence most easily.
  - refurb 5y ago
    What about the people who just like hurting other people?
int_19h 5y ago
I think we need to distinguish between violence and capacity for violence. Yes, we should strive towards a society that tries to solve its problems without violence as much as possible. But new problems appear every now and then, and not all of them can be solved without violence, unfortunately. So we still have to be able to resort to it when needed. Something like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pLb_uc0bo8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pLb_uc0bo8