Violence can never have morally good results?

Question

What is your opinion?

Answer 1

The Greeks would definitely disagree. Violence means something must be destroyed. Sometimes things have to be moved out of the way for progress to be made in another direction.

Morality is always subject to whose morals you're considering.

Answer 2

I once saw a show where a guy cut someone else open with a knife, tore out a piece of his victim, and then saved it in a jar. It was on the medical channel. A surgeon removed a cancerous tumor from his patient.

Make no mistake, there are ALL kinds of tumors. Sometimes the best way of removing them is violent, and sometimes the ONLY way of removing them is violent.

Generally speaking, the word Nature uses for a creature who will never resort to violence is 'lunch'.

“In peace prepare for war, in war prepare for peace. The art of war is of vital importance to the state. It is matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin. Under no circumstances can it be neglected.”
- Sun Tzu

Answer 3

I personally think that violence breeds violence. Although I have heard some say that when they watch violence in movies etc. that it gives them the edge of knowing how to react if a similar curcumstance should it ever happen . But I think that is a small number compared to the number of people who reacts in a totally different way. Look at all the copy cat killers. In todays society's there are increasing numbers of disturbed and angry people and such things just fuel the imagination.

Answer 4

I don't agree with some of the other answerers to your question. There is absolute moral rights and wrongs defined by our Creator. There is a Supreme Being to whom we will be held accountable. His right and wrong will be our right and wrong, whether or not we agree with Him today.

Morally, I agree with you... there is no benefit to violence, ever! Some have said that self-defense is an acceptable form of violence, but that also is predicated upon someone taking a violent act against us, which we can all agree is morally wrong. So, yes... violence is wrong.

We can look forward to the day when it is eradicated, as is prophesied in the Bible: "The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the bullock: and dust shall be the serpent's meat. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, saith the LORD."

Answer 5

Define "morally good". Define violence.
Imagine one person smashes through a door with an axe. Obviously a potentially violent action. A firefighter. Morally good or bad?
Imagine another person is very tranquil and does nothing aggressive or violent. A person watching another person being violently attacked and does nothing. Morally good or bad?

Answer 6

Disagree.
World War II is just one example.
If a murderer entered your home to take your family, would you wreak severe life-ending violence on him? I would. That would be moral, the bad person is dead and the innocent remain alive.
Also, the toddler about to run into the street. GRAB! SPANK! Child learns it is "bad" to run into the street. Protecting children is moral.
Violence often has morally good results. That's why "good" soldier/protector men are considered heros.

Answer 7

YES.......that is true. Turn the other cheek...... how many times? 7 times 70. Violence is the last resort of a limited mind.

Now be a good boy/girl and eat your fried peanut butter and banana sandwich......... BEFORE I RIP YOUR LUNGS OUT !!!

Answer 8

False. Violence can protect people.

Answer 9

Obviously an absurd position to take. Self defense is moral.

Answer 10

my opinion is that there are few of any things in life that are "never" or "always." so i'd say that one could come up w/ an exception if you looked hard enough.