• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Logically defend the statement "Violences never solves anything"

I refuse to defend a grammatically incorrect statement. Remove the plural form from either the noun or the verb. You can't pluralize both. So, it is indefensible.

An equally indefensible statement might be, "Solutions is never violences"
 
tantric said:
I'm just curious - that is a wholly meaningless platitude, right
Click to expand...

What you are trying to attack is the saying the violence is never a good solution, and as all sayings it has obvious exceptions.

A it is only a "wholly meaningless platitude" if you are daft enough to believe it is an absolutf truth.

But it is ver much true in the sense that violent actions often causes anger and violent responses, creating a spiral of increasing violence
 
Malintent said:
I refuse to defend a grammatically incorrect statement. Remove the plural form from either the noun or the verb. You can't pluralize both. So, it is indefensible.

An equally indefensible statement might be, "Solutions is never violences"
Click to expand...

it's an obvious typo - i don't pander to grammar nazis.
 
Someone is trying to rape you. You kill them. Problem solved. Thus the assertion that we are supposed to defend is false.
 
Loren Pechtel said:
Someone is trying to rape you. You kill them. Problem solved. Thus the assertion that we are supposed to defend is false.
Click to expand...

And since you never will ve able to prove that he tried to rape you you will be executed for murder.

Nice "solution"
 
Also, this statement is usually in response to acts of random/senseless violence, so it's at least understandable why some who are fed up with violence would feel that way.
 
Right.

Violence solved Hitler. It has solved a shitload of things, where the consequences of not getting violent were far worse than the violence.

Violence frightens people and thus got a negative moral stigma attached about it being inherently a "bad" thing.
 
There is every chance that violence created Hitler.




The only way that violence can be considered a long term solution is if you deny that violence is, itself, a problem.

If violence is considered something that a society should avoid, then every instance where is appears to have cut a Gordian knot, and solved something, is just an example for every moron who didn't entirely understand the situation to justify their own simplification of issues.

As long as you have force to fall back on you never have to compromise or search for rational solutions.

So yeah, violence can solve things, but creates larger, more far reaching, dilemmas.
 
spikepipsqueak said:
There is every chance that violence created Hitler.
Click to expand...
Ok, so violence created Hitler. And something created that violence, and on and on back to the beginning of time… Looks like a chicken-and-egg conundrum to me.

spikepipsqueak said:
The only way that violence can be considered a long term solution is if you deny that violence is, itself, a problem.
Click to expand...

It's a problem according to what the consequences are, not a problem in itself. Fire's a problem if it's on your skin, it's not a problem if it's on a log and stops you freezing to death.

spikepipsqueak said:
If violence is considered something that a society should avoid, then every instance where is appears to have cut a Gordian knot, and solved something, is just an example for every moron who didn't entirely understand the situation to justify their own simplification of issues.

As long as you have force to fall back on you never have to compromise or search for rational solutions.
Click to expand...
This reminds me of Gandhi's letter to Hitler, asking him to play nice. Of course it went ignored, as everything that doesn't serve violent persons necessarily always will be. Gandhi was being simple and was too lost in idealism to understand the situation.

spikepipsqueak said:
ISo yeah, violence can solve things, but creates larger, more far reaching, dilemmas.
Click to expand...
Sometimes it does. Sometimes it doesn’t.

What came out of pounding Nazi Germany till they finally surrendered that was worse than they themselves?

How is pounding Nazi Germany into submission not a rational solution? Why does “rational” have to mean “peaceful”? What’s irrational about killing some people if their deaths are more a benefit than a loss to most everything on planet earth?

I deny that violence in and of itself is a problem. Yes it can makes things worse. And it can makes things better. And it can do both. I don't know why it must always result in worse things though, or how "it never solves anything" somehow becomes always necessarily true.

Understand, I’m saying life’s too complex for idealism, not that violence is good or bad.
 
It was old. It had been around for eons, patiently accumulating data, planning on creating something that would last. It did not tire, it knew what could and could not be done to get where it wanted to go. It had searched the patterns. It knew.

And it was angry.

Violence solves everything.
 
Kharakov said:
It was old. It had been around for eons, patiently accumulating data, planning on creating something that would last. It did not tire, it knew what could and could not be done to get where it wanted to go. It had searched the patterns. It knew.

And it was angry.

Violence solves everything.
Click to expand...

...and it was not a Quaker. QED.
 
tantric said:
I'm just curious - that is a wholly meaningless platitude, right
Click to expand...

What do you consider "solved"?

World War 1 was pretty violent and it ended with an Armistice which economically crippled Germany, Great Britain and France. This lead directly to WW2, which was more violence, and led to the Cold War, resulting in Proxy wars such as Korea and Viet Nam. And on and on and on.

If you could show one example where violence solved something and did not leave another something which needed solving, you might have a valid statement.
 
Kharakov said:
It was old. It had been around for eons, patiently accumulating data, planning on creating something that would last. It did not tire, it knew what could and could not be done to get where it wanted to go. It had searched the patterns. It knew.

And it was angry.

Violence solves everything.
Click to expand...

Sounds familiar...
HHGTTG? Or Bad Omens?
 
Juma said:
Kharakov said:
It was old. It had been around for eons, patiently accumulating data, planning on creating something that would last. It did not tire, it knew what could and could not be done to get where it wanted to go. It had searched the patterns. It knew.

And it was angry.

Violence solves everything.
Click to expand...

Sounds familiar...
HHGTTG?
Click to expand...
I'm thinking early Clarke, although maybe I was channeling one of the Vogon greats. Not sure....
Juma said:
Or Bad Omens?
Click to expand...
What's that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom