2007-02-03 18:54:20 · 8 answers · asked by john 1 in Social Science ➔ Sociology
nothing wrong with violence in the first place.
A violent act can be fully lawful, moral, and good. Not all violent acts are murder. And only some murders are violent. So you see, not the same thing at all.
For someone who wants to avoid violence, they must first not eat. Mining for fertilizers require violent explosions. Meat and fish? Violent deaths. They must also not have sex. Sexual climax is a violent spasm of muscles.
I hope I have given some extreme examples to show the fallacy of equating violence with evil doing.
Now go and be the best person you can. Start by doing right by your friends and family. Stand up and protect them so they are not victims of evil acts.
2007-02-03 19:04:23 · answer #1 · answered by Dr. Lee 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Violence is generally described as the use of physical force.
Before violence can be justified you must be aware that there are two types of violence: 'Offensive and defensive'. Offensive violence is endangerment to another; either physically, mentally, emotionally or to personal property. Defensive violence is in the effort to protect the integrity of the aforementioned personal or public conditions.
Violence is ‘justified’ if it is used as a response for protecting ones self or another.
2007-02-04 09:15:30 · answer #2 · answered by mr.bond 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You, individually, may never be able to justify it. However, historically, almost every culture has practiced the "eye for an eye" method. Few have individually refused to justify violence...Ghandi, MLK...You are asking a difficult question. Anyone can "justify" actions according to their own beliefs.
2007-02-04 03:11:26 · answer #3 · answered by amy e 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because you need a balance.
2=2
violence=violence
2007-02-04 03:10:20 · answer #4 · answered by Koko Butta Kream 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
violence is typically caused by frustration-and can be used as a last resort for most.
2007-02-04 03:24:55 · answer #5 · answered by selysammi 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Only in self defense or defense of others; Only respond with measured force (i.e. minimum amount of force necessary to neutralise the situation); Don't turn defense in revenge - when the threat retreats, you do too.
That's my take on it anyway...
2007-02-04 03:05:33 · answer #6 · answered by dead_elves 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This should be a very good example of the saying: A pan calling a pot darky.
2007-02-04 09:28:40 · answer #7 · answered by yeng mee k 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
on some occasions its obvious. case by case basis.
last resort
2007-02-04 03:02:08 · answer #8 · answered by rostov 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋