violence is never the answer

Discussion in 'Discussion' started by 61, Dec 3, 2012.

  1. Arch Mana Knight

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2007
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Anywhere
    2,430
    That doesn't make any difference, you realize that right? The Cold War had some serious benefits. Because of the heavy competition, a lot of advances were made. *Cough*Wegottothemoon*cough* There wasn't direct conflict, but during the Cold War we had other wars that were caused by it. So my point still stands.

    The only comparison I wanted to make was to say that both were good. The American Revolution(as well as the Civil War) defined the US as a country and set us up as the most powerful nation this side of the globe.
     
  2. Doukuro Chaser

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2007
    Gender:
    Female
    1,172
    I really dislike it when people try to solve everything with violence or lash out at something that was said. Per example, my sister would hit me at even the slightest joke and I simply do not think that is the way to react. This can be said for any level of violence, from to the lesser to more serve forms.

    In the end I really cannot think of a time it would be okay expect in a manner of self defense. If someone is attacking you, then surely you must defend yourself, right? However if they would not of came at you in the first place any use of violence would have been avoided and everyone would just go about their business.

    I really do think things would be better without it.
     
  3. Misty gimme kiss

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Gender:
    Cisgender Female
    Location:
    alderaan
    6,590
    On a large scale (I'm talking war etc.), I think this becomes a case of the ends justifying the means (or not). Violence may not be pretty but it does, as history has shown us, put a stop to some threats. I am, however, a pacifist and an idealist; I do not believe there is a justification for violence, nor is it the end-all solution. The ends justifying the means is a flawed ideal, in my opinion, because it forces us to sink to a level we should not reach. Defeating an aggressor with violence can make us just as bad as the aggressor in the end, even if we had the right intentions.

    However, I realize that that is not a very realistic view, especially considering humanity; not to say that man is inherently violent or evil, quite the contrary. But our deep and often frantic emotionality sometimes needs a physical outlet, like how some have mentioned getting into physical altercations with friends. To deny that would be to deny a basic human component--but I believe that, on a large scale, there are alternate options. Diplomacy, of course. Civil disobedience. Simple, honest conversation. I don't believe the majority of people would jump to war as their knee-jerk reaction to a threat, nor would many resort to violence to achieve their means. If enough of us stand against such means, I don't believe violence would be as prevalent as it is in our culture.

    And to be lame and quote Doctor Who: "Violence doesn't end violence, it extends it."
     
  4. Peace and War Bianca, you minx!

    Joined:
    May 25, 2007
    Gender:
    Cisgender Male
    1,282
    But it was the very lack of violence in the Cold War that led to those developments. If it had been a proper armed conflict those scientists wouldn't have have been developing a propulsion system to pass through the atmosphere, but one attached to nuclear warheads. Just becasue it has war in the title doesn't dictate enormous amounts of violence, nor that the violence caused any benefits.

    And that's a very narrow view to say that on the whole the Revoutionary War was good. It lead to the killing of tens of thousands of natives by Americans, the extinction of the Bison, the development of the nuclear bomb, etc. And if all that death and violence worse worth colonists saying, "yeah we're in charge now" before putting on massive restrictions on its populace, the dominance of Christainty as being the only accepted religion for centuries, the subjugation of black slaves and numerous other disgusting parts in history, the. Hes it was worth it all.

    Really strange examples, not to mention very culturally narrow.
     
  5. Arch Mana Knight

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2007
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Anywhere
    2,430
    ...No. It was the threat of violence that lead to those developments. It was because we were ready for all out nuclear war, what could have been the worst event in human history. The lack of direct fighting means nothing. Things like this(wars or threats) have caused some of the fastest advances in scientific history.

    It's not narrow when it's true. Are you seriously implying that the Revolutionary War was what caused the nuclear bomb to be developed? Though it's another argument for another time, that wasn't even a terrible thing to happen. The same physical principles that lead to the "nuke's" development also is responsible for the creation of nuclear reactors, our best source for clean energy. It's like you're implying we started a lot of bad things when they were in existence before the US became a country. If we were focused on freeing slaves instead of fighting a war things could have turned out much worse. It was worth it. Especially because after the war it wasn't like development just stopped. With the Civil War, slaves were freed(yes, that wasn't the point of that war but it was a result).

    Culturally narrow? ...That has nothing to do with anything. I'm giving examples I can relate to most. I'm no historian. I'm not going to talk about something that happened in China or Africa(no offense to those places) when I don't have nearly enough knowledge to speak about such things. My examples may be strange, but I firmly believe they were ultimately good.
     
  6. Misty gimme kiss

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Gender:
    Cisgender Female
    Location:
    alderaan
    6,590
    But all of these things could have been achieved without the threat of violence and without a violent context. Take nuclear energy, for example--yes, the creation of the atomic bomb during the 20th century contributed to that. But we could have easily pursued nuclear energy out of a desire for green energy rather than it being a byproduct of a quick ( and inhumane ) way to kill people. Asserting our superiority over Russia during the Cold War is what led to the Space Race, but face it, we would have tried to get to the moon eventually. We're too curious to bind ourselves to just our planet when we know there's so much more out there.

    Violence may have positive ends, but violence is not the sole way to reach those ends, nor can those ends possibly outweigh the costs of reaching them.
     
  7. Mysty Unknown

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Location:
    Unknown
    835
    Of course violence is never the answer... it is the solution. Me being a Christian goody goody is going to say no. Every problem can be worked out through debate and speech. You just need to let each other lay out what the issue is and try to resolve it peacefully.