Violence? - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

For discussion of moral and ethical issues.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
User avatar
By Mercenary
#14740275
Do you believe violence is morally justified? If so, under what circumstances, if any?

I believe in a strict adherence to non-aggression. I believe that imprisonment, execution, conscription, torture, and institutional intimidation are all acts of aggression. I believe in common defense - Violence is warranted in defense of members of my community, when they are being subjected to acts of aggression.
User avatar
By Saeko
#14740292
Violence is always morally justified.

I believe in a strict adherence to non-aggression. I believe that imprisonment, execution, conscription, torture, and institutional intimidation are all acts of aggression. I believe in common defense - Violence is warranted in defense of members of my community, when they are being subjected to acts of aggression.


One man's Roosevelt is another man's Hitler.
User avatar
By Mercenary
#14740294
Virtue of thought is not a substantive source of morality.

It is fallible, especially with the apex of morality being happiness.
User avatar
By Mercenary
#14740303
You were implying that violence is justified as long as you believe it is justified. That is known as virtue of thought, which is a philosophical theory espoused by Aristotle.

I used to trend towards that school of thought, but now find utilitarianism to be more convincing. If we view utility as the ultimate pursuit in life, then violence can only be morally justified when it maximizes utility, or mitigates its loss.
User avatar
By Saeko
#14740338
Mercenary wrote:You were implying that violence is justified as long as you believe it is justified.


No. I very clearly said that violence is always justified. What I was getting at in the second sentence is that what one party views as defense, another may view as an offense.

That is known as virtue of thought, which is a philosophical theory espoused by Aristotle.


I don't think Aristotle said anything of the sort.

I used to trend towards that school of thought, but now find utilitarianism to be more convincing. If we view utility as the ultimate pursuit in life, then violence can only be morally justified when it maximizes utility, or mitigates its loss.


But what if I don't view utility as the ultimate pursuit in life?
User avatar
By Mercenary
#14740340
Saeko wrote:No. I very clearly said that violence is always justified. What I was getting at in the second sentence is that what one party views as defense, another may view as an offense.

I don't think Aristotle said anything of the sort.

But what if I don't view utility as the ultimate pursuit in life?


Not having a universal consensus on the moral usage of violence, does not legitimize all acts of violence. Edward Abbey made a similar argument, except he maintained that no violence was acceptable as a result. Frankly, I find the argument to be rather idiotic.

Okay, well I cannot control what you think.

Then either you are misguided, or I am mistaken. What in life is a worthier pursuit than happiness?
User avatar
By quetzalcoatl
#14740342
Saeko wrote:But what if I don't view utility as the ultimate pursuit in life?


You will be superseded by someone who does. You are hammer, a tool. As such, your only value is your economic value. By extension your only value is your utility. When the tool is broken or obsolete you throw it away.

You are 'free' to disagree with this analysis, but functionally it is true. Unless you take some concrete steps to change the reality that makes it true.

Mercenary wrote:What in life is a worthier pursuit than happiness?

If you are not alive, you won't be happy. If you are starving you won't be happy. If you are ill you won't be happy. Happiness is fairly far down on the scale of immediate pursuits.
User avatar
By Mercenary
#14740343
quetzalcoatl wrote:If you are not alive, you won't be happy. If you are starving you won't be happy. If you are ill you won't be happy. Happiness is fairly far down on the scale of immediate pursuits.


Humans that strive through starvation and disease, do so endeavoring to one day be happy. Happiness is always the foremost life pursuit. Why live if you do not desire for happiness?

It is interconnected. For one to pursue utility, they must think about their own survival. Make no mistake, the end goal is still always happiness.
User avatar
By quetzalcoatl
#14740344
Mercenary wrote:Humans that strive through starvation and disease, do so endeavoring to one day be happy. Happiness is always the foremost life pursuit. Why live if you do not desire for happiness?

It is interconnected. For one to pursue utility, they must think about their own survival. Make no mistake, the end goal is still always happiness.


Happiness, meh... It's so subjective. For one person happiness is buying enough stock in XYZ Company to force them to 'maximize shareholder value' (lay a bunch of people off). For somebody else, it's shooting all the neighborhood cats. Some benighted souls are happy playing a Bach invention.

But only one thing is objectively and measurably true, and that's the number of zeros in your net worth.
User avatar
By Mercenary
#14740347
quetzalcoatl wrote:Happiness, meh... It's so subjective.


So what?

For one person happiness is buying enough stock in XYZ Company to force them to 'maximize shareholder value' (lay a bunch of people off). For somebody else, it's shooting all the neighborhood cats. Some benighted souls are happy playing a Bach invention.

But only one thing is objectively and measurably true, and that's the number of zeros in your net worth.


What motivates you to keep living? Surely it can't be money or status.
User avatar
By Saeko
#14740354
Mercenary wrote:Not having a universal consensus on the moral usage of violence, does not legitimize all acts of violence.


Never said it did. All I said was that the concepts of offense and defense are very subjective. Whether or not that alone legitimizes all or any violence is a different matter.

What in life is a worthier pursuit than happiness?


Nothing is more worthy and nothing is less worthy. To me, the whole idea of objective value or worth is nonsense.
User avatar
By Hong Wu
#14740357
I think sometimes people have the option of leaving instead of engaging in violence but it's not always an option, laying down and dying obviously isn't going to fly either. Ultimately it's not that different from other moral questions, why are you doing it? Intent determines culpability more than anything else. Violence usually makes for the worst of crimes but it's simplistic to just ban violence because the criminals will still have guns :excited:
#14740360
Mercenary wrote:Do you believe violence is morally justified? If so, under what circumstances, if any?

Violence is morally justified where it serves to protect good people. The problem is defining what is good people and what is protection.
User avatar
By Bulaba Khan Jones
#14740363
Mercenary wrote:You were implying that violence is justified as long as you believe it is justified. That is known as virtue of thought, which is a philosophical theory espoused by Aristotle.

I used to trend towards that school of thought, but now find utilitarianism to be more convincing. If we view utility as the ultimate pursuit in life, then violence can only be morally justified when it maximizes utility, or mitigates its loss.


If I believe that violence is justified, and you believe that violence is justified, then violence is justified. Just as if we were to consider what happens if you and I believe that I can float this very moment...
User avatar
By Saeko
#14740365
Bulaba Jones wrote:If I believe that violence is justified, and you believe that violence is justified, then violence is justified. Just as if we were to consider what happens if you and I believe that I can float this very moment...


Heh. :D
By Decky
#14740492
Violence is morally justified when it advances the position of the working class.
User avatar
By Mercenary
#14740678
Saeko wrote:Never said it did. All I said was that the concepts of offense and defense are very subjective. Whether or not that alone legitimizes all or any violence is a different matter.

Nothing is more worthy and nothing is less worthy. To me, the whole idea of objective value or worth is nonsense.


So your comment was a non-witty reminder that opinions are subjective.

As long as reality exists, there will always be objective truths. You do not need to believe it
User avatar
By Mercenary
#14740680
Bulaba Jones wrote:If I believe that violence is justified, and you believe that violence is justified, then violence is justified. Just as if we were to consider what happens if you and I believe that I can float this very moment...


You can't be serious? I never said violence is inherently justified. I said that violence can be justified.

"Ukraine’s real losses should be counted i[…]

I would bet you have very strong feelings about DE[…]

@Rugoz A compromise with Putin is impossibl[…]

@KurtFF8 Litwin wages a psyops war here but we […]