Home Categories About
argument top image
Is violence always wrong? Is violence always wrong?
Yes, violence is always wrong Yes, violence is always wrong
No, violence is never wrong No, violence is never wrong
Violence can be justified depending on the reason Violence can be justified depending on the reason
Interpersonal and community violence is always wrong Interpersonal and community violence is always wrong
Collective, politically or economically motivated violence is unjust Collective, politically or economically motivated violence is unjust
Self-directed violence is always wrong Self-directed violence is always wrong
Violence can result in lifelong consequences Violence can result in lifelong consequences
Humans are inherently violent Humans are inherently violent
Violence is necessary for peace and power Violence is necessary for peace and power
Violence as an act of self-defense is warranted Violence as an act of self-defense is warranted
Debate Mini Map

Is violence always wrong?
Back to question

No, violence is never wrong

< (2 of 3) Next position >

Humans are inherently violent

Human violence is not a contemporary concept, but it is deeply rooted in our ancient history. It has shaped our physical characteristics as well as our brain mechanisms.
Thomas Hobbes David Carrier Richard Wrangham
< (1 of 2) Next argument >

The Argument

Wars between chimpanzee communities were first speculated in the 1970s, and theories were raised about how such conflicts occur and what they teach us about human violence. In ancient times, Richard Wrangham argues that human males showed the same capacity for violence and dominance as male chimpanzees did. [1] Evidence from the sites of the early massacres shows that massive battles took place between people where mass graves with jumbles of shattered bones and pierced skulls were found. [2] Such theories and observations confirm that violence is not a wrong and right question but rather an innate act. Humans cannot avoid it.

Counter arguments

A biological anthropologist, Agustin Fuentes, argues that most people in the world aren't violent, so it is not correct to consider violence as an innate human trait. [3] According to documentation by Douglas Fry, 70 societies in the world don't contribute to war at all. There is no warfare or other sorts of extreme violence they take part in. [4] So violence cannot be excused by describing it as an innate trait, but rather should be avoided and prevented by humans for safety and peace.

Proponents

Premises

Rejecting the premises

References

  1. https://www.theperspective.com/debates/living/humans-inherently-violent/
  2. https://www.discovermagazine.com/planet-earth/are-humans-inherently-violent-what-an-ancient-battle-site-tells-us
  3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=66IeDfeGbzA&ab_channel=TEDxTalks
  4. https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/worlds_without_war
This page was last edited on Tuesday, 20 Oct 2020 at 20:41 UTC

Explore related arguments