Violence is never justifiable.

Question

Answer

Con: If people do not defend themselves against violent aggression, then they will always be controlled by violent aggressors.

Answer

Con: Even if violence cannot be inherently just, it may still be necessary.

Answer

Pro: Violence intrinsically negates any good that may come from an action.

Answer

Pro: To achieve any goal through violence implies that it is permissible for the strongest to impose their will over the weakest. This is abusive behavior and it is immoral.

Is war a necessary evil?

Violence is never justifiable.

Pros

Cons

Violence intrinsically negates any good that may come from an action.

To achieve any goal through violence implies that it is permissible for the strongest to impose their will over the weakest. This is abusive behavior and it is immoral.

If people do not defend themselves against violent aggression, then they will always be controlled by violent aggressors.

Even if violence cannot be inherently just, it may still be necessary.

Selected claim, supporting its parent

Violence is never justifiable.

Pro claim 1

Violence intrinsically negates any good that may come from an action.

Pro claim 2

To achieve any goal through violence implies that it is permissible for the strongest to impose their will over the weakest. This is abusive behavior and it is immoral.

Con claim 1

If people do not defend themselves against violent aggression, then they will always be controlled by violent aggressors.

Con claim 2

Even if violence cannot be inherently just, it may still be necessary.