On Violence

[Paleophyte]

Would it be morally justified to use violence to stop a man who was raping a child? If not, then standing by and letting the rape proceed must be a more moral act, then.

Boru

The word violence is not the word I would use. Yes, it is justified to use force in this scenario. However, at least in the American system, you are not justified in killing him or maming him. I would assume the law allows you to use only enough force to stop the act. (Of course, the jury may be completely fine with you killing him.) So I would consider the unjust act of force to be examples of violence.

This isn't an arbitrary distinction. The word violence, even though it refers to force, still carries a negative sense. No one hears the word violence and infers a neutral or positive use of force. The force used when teams play sports, for example, is not the same as the violence used when teams start physically fighting.

This feels like philosophy by definition. If we define violence as the unjust, unethical, or unnecessary application of force then yes, by definition, it's going to be pretty counterproductive.  You need to use a definition that isn't going to result in a lot of circular reasoning. I think that'll be difficult for you. There have been more than a few examples in recent history where we've done some pretty horribly violent things that are widely viewed as being the right thing to do.

If good people do not engage in violence, then who is left to oppose bad people who do?