Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
No. Legitimate violence usually adjusts the payoff table for different strategies of participants so that destructive strategies are no longer attractive (see game theory, such as this one).
There are a huge number of examples: the fear of violence with almost 100% efficiency makes you pay taxes, give up theft, robbery, robbery, etc. That is, the fear of violence prevents violence.
And the inevitability of such legitimate violence is a critical part.
Violence begets violence only when the person who is experiencing violence can pour it out. I remember there was a picture of the boss yelling at the man, the man yelling at his wife, the wife yelling at her son, the son yelling at the cat, and the cat hanged himself. A bit of black humor,but I think it's appropriate. And I really believe that the lack of the ability to pour out violence creates despair, a tendency to suicide, a desire to close somewhere forever from everyone in a corner. It's a sad subject, but in general it generates either violence or self-flagellation.�
Thank you for your question and good luck!
Violence causes retaliatory violence mainly when the person who has been subjected to violence perceives it as unjustified or excessive. The desire to respond with a blow to a blow arises in this case naturally and inevitably. If the other party reacts in the same way, a vicious circle is formed, which is extremely difficult to break out of.�
Of course, attempts at retaliatory violence can be suppressed by harsh measures, but this does not solve the problem, but only drives it deeper. Mutual hatred and thirst for revenge grow, and sooner or later find a way out. So there were slave uprisings, peasant riots and various revolutions. The result is often quite different from what the protesters expected and desired, and problems can arise again and again. It is impossible to solve them by resorting to even tougher measures.
At the same time, violence used by the State on a reasonable scale and within the framework of the law does not have such a cumulative effect and does not lead to an increase in retaliatory violence.
Aggression in the behavior of adults is most often caused by violence that they were subjected to in childhood/adolescence.
Violence on the part of the state is most often directed not at respecting the interests of people (legality), but at preserving the security of the thieving elite (minority) from the robbed people (majority). It is hardly justified ; -)))))
Heh, “magic pendel” is also violence, but it generates labor productivity, timely work done and, as a result, generates a salary for the person who received this pendel 🙂
–
But if it is a little more serious, then violence CAN give rise to anything, including other violence. Or it may not generate it. It depends on the people.
And sometimes the absence of violence ( in particular, a sense of impunity) can lead to violence.
And a timely slap on the back of the head (also violence) can save lives, for example, prevent fingers from getting into the socket, sometimes even literally.
“An eye for an eye will lead to the blindness of the world,” as Mr. Gandhi claimed. Is this really the case? It's worth investigating. The point is that the universe has a pattern of balance, according to which everything in this world serves for something and does not disturb the balance. That is, the amount of violence = the amount of good and buns. “Alas and ah, but violence prevails on the territory of the CIS,” you may say. Very similar, but no. We also have a lot of good nature and cordiality, but it's just not as advertised as in other countries. However, that's not the point.�
Yes, violence begets violence. Like any force that needs to be countered. The issue is the concentration of violence and its multilevel nature.
Violence breeds suffering. How to respond to violence and suffering is up to everyone to decide for themselves. Someone responds with violence. Some do not understand that they are being abused. Someone tries not to notice. Someone is trying to smooth out the consequences of violence. Some are immune to violence because they are in a state of self-denial from the world. In any case, violence has painful consequences (at least for those who knowingly commit violence), and no-these consequences do not always lead to retaliatory violence.