Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Special pages
Niidae Wiki
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Violence
(section)
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
== Philosophical perspectives == {{expand section|date=December 2022}} Some philosophers have argued that any interpretation of reality is intrinsically violent.{{efn|name=knowledge|'any interpretation of reality is always a form of violence in the sense that knowledge "can only be a violation of the things to be known" ... Several philosophers following [[Nietzsche]], [[Heidegger]], [[Foucault]], and [[Derrida]] have emphasized and explicated this fundamental violence.'<ref name="foucault">{{cite book|author=Johanna Oksala|title=Foucault, Politics, and Violence|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=wQzaok_Y-jgC&pg=PR1|year=2012|publisher=Northwestern University Press|isbn=978-0810128026|pages=1β}}</ref> }} [[Slavoj Ε½iΕΎek]] in his book ''Violence'' stated that "something violent is the very symbolization of a thing."{{Citation needed|date=December 2023}} An [[ontology|ontological]] perspective considers the harm inflicted by the very interpretation of the world as a form of violence that is distinct from physical violence in that it is possible to avoid physical violence whereas some [[Ontology|ontological]] violence is intrinsic to all knowledge.{{efn|"While the ontological violence of language does, in significant ways, sustain, enable, and encourage physical violence, it is a serious mistake to conflate them. [...] Violence is understood to be ineliminable in the first sense, and this leads to its being treated as a fundamental in the second sense, too.""<ref name="foucault"/>{{rp|36}}}}{{Citation needed|date=December 2023}} Both [[Michel Foucault|Foucault]] and [[Hannah Arendt|Arendt]] considered the relationship between [[Power (social and political)|power]] and violence but concluded that while related they are distinct.<ref name="foucault" />{{rp|46}} In [[feminist philosophy]], [[epistemic injustice|epistemic violence]] is the act of causing harm by an inability to understand the conversation of others due to ignorance. Some philosophers think this will harm marginalized groups.{{efn|name=epistemic|"Epistemic violence in testimony is a refusal, intentional or unintentional, of an audience to communicatively reciprocate a linguistic exchange owing to pernicious ignorance"<ref name="Dotson 2011 pp. 236β257">{{cite journal | last=Dotson | first=Kristie | title=Tracking Epistemic Violence, Tracking Practices of Silencing | journal=Hypatia | publisher=Cambridge University Press (CUP) | volume=26 | issue=2 | year=2011 | issn=0887-5367 | doi=10.1111/j.1527-2001.2011.01177.x | pages=236β57| s2cid=144313735 }}</ref>}}{{Citation needed|date=December 2023}} [[Brad Evans (author)|Brad Evans]] states that violence "represents a violation in the very conditions constituting what it means to be human as such", "is always an attack upon a person's [[dignity]], their sense of [[self]]hood, and their future", and "is both an ontological crime ... and a form of political ruination".<ref>[https://www.historiesofviolence.com/philosophy The Histories of Violence project]</ref> In a more general sense, [[Robert L. Holmes]] argues that while specific definitions of ''violence'' per se may continue to elude mankind, it is nonetheless apparent that ''any'' appeal to its use is ''morally wrong'' on purely rational grounds in so far as "it is presumptively wrong to do violence to innocent persons."<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=TBoABAAAQBAJ&q=Robert+L.+Holms''On War and Morality.'' Holmes, Robert L. Princeton University Press (1989) p. 44 "it is presumptively wrong to do violence to innocent persons."isbn 978-1-4008-6014-2 on Google Books]</ref> He further argues that at least one necessary condition for the formulation of ''any'' potential moral alternative to violence in all its manifistations is the exploration of a philosophy of [[nonviolence]] which places a concern for the lives and the well being of individual persons at its moral center.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=TBoABAAAQBAJ&q=Robert+L.+Holms''On War and Morality.'' Holmes, Robert L. Princeton University Press (1989) p. 293 isbn 978-1-4008-6014-2 on Google Books]</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Holmes |first=Robert L. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=TBoABAAAQBAJ&q=Robert+L.+Holms |title=On War and Morality |date=24 March 2025 |publisher=Princeton University Press |isbn=978-1-4008-6014-2}}</ref><ref>[https://www.jstor.org/action/doBasicSearch?Query=ti%3A%22On+War+and+Morality%22&so=rel ''On War and Morality'' Holmes, Robert L. Book reviews on JASTOR.org]</ref>
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Niidae Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
Encyclopedia:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)
Search
Search
Editing
Violence
(section)
Add topic