English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

If violence also creates fear,
fear creates mistrust,
mistrust creates misunderstanding,
and misunderstanding creates violence.

2007-10-31 06:49:17 · 20 answers · asked by ★Greed★ 7 in Arts & Humanities Philosophy

20 answers

Self defense was even understood as necessary by Buddha. People are often ignorant, and have to be taught a lesson. But it is when you become a vigilante, or bully that you become what you try to solve.

2007-10-31 06:53:09 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

Violence, in and of itself, does not create peace. The threat of violence (does not have to be an open threat) can create and preserve peace. For example, certain countries may not like the U.S. or the UK, but the military might of these two countries makes a lot of rulers think twice about doing anything that might provoke military action. However, as we all know, that's not an absolute rule. Some leaders will defy the entire world while in positions of power. There's a long list of people we could name: Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Idi Amin, Saddam Hussein, the list goes on and on. The problem is there will always be people who covet power, and these people will do whatever it takes to get it. Once they get it, I can chisel it in stone for you they'll abuse it, often in the form of human rights abuses of those they supposedly "lead." There are only two ways to deal with people like that: (1) Remove them from power by use of force, or (2) Simply bury our heads in the sand and let them take away our rights.

2007-10-31 07:01:56 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Self defense. Sometimes, you just need to punch that bully in the nose to keep him from taking your milk money. (Don't say telling the teacher is a peaceful alternative, the teacher is simply a benevolent threat to the bully)

By the way, the rest of your logic is fallacious. All four points are incorrectly stated as absolute. For example, many fear God, but do not distrust him, disproving your second point as always true. And if any of your points are not always true, then your premise (violence) may result in many conclusions including, but not limited to, violence.

For example, using my example for fear/respect, I can illustrate the biblical format for Peace from violence:

Violence creates fear
Fear creates respect
Respect creates loyalty
Loyalty creates peace

2007-10-31 07:40:08 · answer #3 · answered by Houston, we have a problem 7 · 1 0

You must define peace first. If you mean a pie in the sky Utopian kind of peace then "no" you will never get there through violence. You can however establish a diplomatic time of non aggression which most consider peace through violence. Although your goal must be peace for violence to work.

2007-10-31 07:08:13 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Violence only provides the excuse to respond with greater violence. Violence is mainly a male thing. It has to do with accumulation of power, and money. I am in a relationship with a male who, while verbalizing his intention to use violence to protect his priorities, mainly our safety, also accepts that violence is not the main variable for the provision of peace. True global peace will result when the leaders of the national governments use dialog, respect for ethnic differences, provision for the assistance that will contribute and result in the healthy survival of the threatened global nations, and lastly, but most importantly, the recognition that women national leadership will address, and provide for the resources that will contribute to the survival of our global population.

2007-10-31 07:17:56 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Violence can create peace directly.

If there is no one left that disagrees, then there is total agreement. Granted that is the most brutal and immoral path to peace, but just the threat of it worked for the "Pax Romana".

2007-10-31 06:53:24 · answer #6 · answered by juicy_wishun 6 · 2 0

Violence could be a form of peace if you think about it like this- remember the writer who recently made up a character about a "good" serial killer? This serial killer only bestowed violence against others that had a sick urge to kill innocent people. Therefore, if there were actually killers out there with this type of mentality, wouldn't there be LESS violence in the end?

Sorry if I steered your question in the wrong direction.

2007-10-31 06:59:58 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

Violence creats peace because when the world is in turmoil violence creates fear fear does NOT create mistrust it creates loyalty.

2007-10-31 06:53:47 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

that is good in theory however take your theory and watch teen age kids chop peoples heads off the only way to stop them is to eliminate them they are evil and they are the followers of evil
as far as mistrust go spend some time over there and see how much trust you have
and if you allow it to continue it will consume us all
darn good thing that attitude you have wasnt around at time ww11 we never would have made it this far

2007-10-31 06:55:31 · answer #9 · answered by jim1 5 · 1 0

I don`t know if it directly creates peace but we do know the impact of violence and from that we can then define exactly what peace is and know then when we have achieved it.

2007-10-31 06:52:31 · answer #10 · answered by finn mchuil 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers