Is violence ethical, and if so, when and where? — john27
Is violence ethical, and if so, when and where? — john27
I believe just about any violence will be declared "ethical" IF and WHENEVER large nation interests are at stake. This goes for pretty much any country. "War is diplomacy conducted by other methods." — Bitter Crank
what is antithetical to reason, madness. I guess in those terms, violence is seen as being ethical when it is applied to unreason:
...the age of reason confined. It confined the debauched, spendthrift fathers, prodigal sons, blasphemers, men who "seek to undo themselves," libertines. And through these parallels, these strange complicities, the age sketched the profile of its own experience of unreason. — Pantagruel
The only time violence is condoned is when people who resort to it do so out of desperation. What is necessary can neither be good nor evil. — Agent Smith
Huh. So violence is like a cure/response to madness, if I understand correctly? — john27
That is the suggestion, as an historical analysis. Violence as enforcing reason. It is kind of chilling. — Pantagruel
Yeah, despite the dire setting, I wouldn't necessarily agree that violence is an ethical response. — john27
No, but they are complementary. Preemptive, proportional violence sufficient to neutralize violent aggression and deter (disincentivizes e.g. punishes) further aggressions is justified. Responsive, proportional violence sufficient to reduce further harms to aggressors and/or victims is ethical. Protection from violence and reduction of violence, respectively.Is justifiable and ethical the same thing? — john27
How reactionary (monkey brain "macho") of you. :brow:I am a proponent of using whatever amount of force I chose to get the job done in the most efficient manner possible. So yes, if that means someone has to die, they are going to die as efficiently as I can make it happen. If I can end the threat without death, great. If I am not sure, oh well, efficiency wins. — Book273
s justifiable and ethical the same thing? — john27
I don't believe that violence is ever an ethical choice. But I think that the "defense of reason" position may be one of the strongest. — Pantagruel
"His method consisted in forcing the insane to perform the most difficult tasks of farming, in using them as beasts of burden, as servants, in reducing them to an ultimate obedience with a barrage of blows at the least act of revolt." — Pantagruel
"is violence ethical?" Is actually an incomplete question. Firstly because the answer is rather straight forward, in no ethical system is violence per se ethical, all frown upon it, but then the thornier question becomes: when is violence considered ethical. — Tobias
Therefore my argument would be that the default position is that violence is unethical, but there might be cases in which it may be ethical to use force. — Tobias
What a picturesque scenario. Almost romantic, in a weird way. — john27
How could we complete/reform the question? — john27
Responsive, proportional violence sufficient to reduce further harms to aggressors and/or victims is ethical. Protection from violence and reduction of violence, respectively. — 180 Proof
I think the responses would also be better if you limit the question to a certain ethical theory. "I violence always unethical according to Kantian ethics?" — Tobias
I suppose then it wouldn't necessarily be violence, but a physical act of control. However, violence is often brutal, and sometimes justifiable not necessarily ethical. I guess maybe a more accurate question would be, is the act of inflicting injury upon someone else ethical? — john27
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.