In your ranking of things you value, which is ranked higher:
- Not using force/violence44.1%
- Caring for the poor/weak55.9%
2,384 votesFinal results
Conversation
Show replies
Replying to
To clarify: "force/violence" as you intend it here can also be non-aggression, is proportionally defensive/punitive, right? In that case for example I see no retro avoid it. If if was intended mostly as aggression, I'd change my answer.
2
1
Some will misconstrue the second into means that are inappropriate, so I must stick with the first, only then can I morally accomplish the second
1
5
Replying to
Between action and inaction, I think action is more powerful, right? Not using force/violence doesn’t mean that you are actively constructing a better world.
2
Replying to
The problem here is that these aren't really directly comparable in a vacuum, "not doing" vs. "doing", and context changes everything, in a self-defense scenario I value caring for the poor/weak "more", but in that instance it doesn't matter
Replying to
There are many situations where force/violence (or the credible threat of it) are necessary, so I can’t universally condemn force per se. Whereas it’s not often the case that explicitly not caring for people in general is necessary.
So I (reluctantly) voted for caring.
