Tuesday, February 26, 2013
Are nonviolent solutions always the best solutions?
When discussing the town's reaction to his defense of Tom Robinson, Atticus tells Scout in Chapter 9 of TKaM, " '...you just hold your head high and keep your fists down...Try fighting with your head for a change..."(p.101) Why or why shouldn't people resist violence in all cases and at all costs? Feel free to use any anecdotal evidence from the novel, non-violent resistance movements in history (led by Gandhi, MLK), and your own experience to support your opinion. Write a paragraph of at least five sentences and then respond to two classmates in at least one well-written sentence for each.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
#2
ReplyDeleteNon-violent solutions are always the best. People should resist violence because in reality it doesn't fix anything. Like for instance if you hate this girl, then you beat her up, that doesn't make you like her anymore. It just shows that you can beat someone up. Martin Luther King Jr. didn't use violence and he got his point across just fine. People who speak their minds, instead of throwing their fists genereally, get farther in life than people that join into violence.
Comp. 4
DeleteI agree with you that violence doesn't solve hardly any issues. I also believe that people should be able to have self-defense for themselves.
30. I think non-violent solutions are mostly always the best too, #2. Fighting doesn't fix anything.
Deletei agree it is dumb to just show that you can beat someone up and start a fight over nothing because you can lose many friends that way.
Delete12. I think that sometimes you have to use violence if someone was like being violent to you. It's only self defence and I do agree that It really won't fix anything and yeah some people do use vioence like with anger towards someone so thats really not an exception, but sometimes you have to use violence.
Delete3. Non violent solutions are always the best. Through all the history non violent solutions have given more good results that violent solutions. One good example is world war, instead of a calmed reaction Germans started one of the better known wars. Atticus's advice to Scout was again a good one.
Delete30. People should resist violence in appropiate cases because using non-violent resistance gets you somewhere, where as fighting rarely ever does. For example, Martin Luther King used non-violent resistance and did not promote violence, and he ended up lessening segregation. I 've never really encountered a situation where someone wanted to physically hurt me or whatever though. I don't really have a straight forward experience with using violence and non-violence. Sometimes though, I think violence is acceptable if and only if it's through court and the opponent deserves it?
ReplyDelete#20 I agree that violence doesn't often get you anywhere, however in some cases you must use violence to defend yourself. Usually, one can't wait for a court of law to punish someone.
Delete13. I agree with you that resisting violence rarely gets you anywhere because there are always consequences for those actions. But also that people should use it if the other person shows it toward you or deserves it.
DeleteComp. 4 (JD)
ReplyDeleteNearly all situations, whether tense or calm, require a different solution to help out the situation. I believe that some situations do require more than being calm.Many times though, I have seen positives that come out of someone being calm when another is not. With violence, there is also many side affects that aren't thought about in the particular moment. With peace, you can look back at the situation, and remember that nothing horrible did, or could have gone wrong that day. Gandhi went far with his peaceful ways, so why can't someone in our everyday modern life? MLK started a movement of thousands of people, so why can a new movement begin with just words of peace, instead of violence and death?
30. I totally agree with you, #4. I like your way of viewing different situations and violence.
Delete24. I totally agree with the fact that not every situation can be fixed with a calm deportment. (VOCAB WORD!)
DeleteLatioSkyShaymin+SuperMario64~
DeleteCertainly! I think this is very true. It is very detailed and nicely written, but you do mean "can't" in the final sentence, right?
16. I think that nonviolence is not always the best answer but it should be the first. You shouldn't always turn to violence. However it is sometimes need. Peaceful protest like Rosa Parks can work in many situation. However some cases need violence to be solve. When you don't use violence and the other people do then you are the victim.
ReplyDeleteComp. 4
DeleteI also agree with you that non-violence is not always the answer. If you have to defend yourself then you should, but if that's not the case, then violence should not be the answer
29
DeleteI agree also because logic is always the best answer. Unless you are in complete danger, you shouldn't jump to violence.
15. What kind of cases need violence to be solved?
Delete21. I agree violence should never be the first but if it can't be stopped it can't be stopped.If you must do it then it has to be done but trying to use a non-violent way first.
Delete10.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, people should resist violence as best as possible. If anything, violence would be the last resort. I always have people telling me a whole bunch of things that I myself did not know about myself. I usually confront people if they're talking behind my back and if they don't get the message the first time, then someone is bound to get hurt.
To #10
DeleteFrom #27
I like your opinion, people should resist violence at all times if possible. Violence is a last resort but it's not the only resort. Like you, I confront people if they talk behind my back and stuff.
I agree with you completely if they don't get in the first then they just want to get there but kicked
Delete29- People should resist violence in all cases and at all costs because it could get you in a lot of trouble. You could get in trouble by the law, parents, and also by a school. MLK tried to avoid violence but violence was acted upon him. He didn't ask for it, he was against it. MLK's death was an act of violence.
ReplyDelete28. Violence can be used in certain situations, like if a person is trying to kill an entire race or an important person. Violence may sometimes be avoided, but it can't be avoided all the time.
Delete14-4
ReplyDeleteI agree because whenever an argumement leads to violence even through words someone always gets hurt. also when you hurt someone you dont feel better about yourself eathier. also it can become very serious such as you can be put in jail for murder or such as Martin Luther King Jr should not have benn killed for helping a race.
20/4. There are many circumstances to which you must decide whether or not to participate in violence. In most cases, I believe that non-violence is the best way to approach situations. History has made it clear that a non-violent approach to things end in success. Take Nelson Mandela's approach to Apartheid; he never physically fought back, but used his intelligence and patience to get his point across. On the other hand, there are some circumstances in which violence is the only way to defend yourself. Clearly, it can go both ways depending on the situation.
ReplyDelete13. I totally agree with this because like you said history shows us more than once when violence wasn't the best choice. I also agree that it just depends on the situation.
Delete24. People should try not to resort to violence because it not only causes physical harm, but it can lead to anger issues and legal problems. But, violence can be necessary in certain cases. School yard violence is never okay, no matter the situation. When it came to Gandhi, he went after what he wanted, but he never got violent. When it comes to life or death situations, violence can be the only way out. But, children shouldn't resort to violence because it can cause problems in there later life.
ReplyDelete#20 I agree, for violence should only be used as a last resort, but in some cases it is necessary. However, I must disagree on the issue of schoolyard violence; one should always defend themselves when put in a dangerous or harmful situation.
Delete12.I agree with you when you say violence can be necessary in certain cases.
Delete21. I agree it can lead to many problems.But I do agree that it can be the only way.
Delete16. I agree with what 2 said because beating somebody doesn't solve anything.
ReplyDeleteViolence should not be used to solve issues. Peace can be used to make alot of things. Martin King, Gandi and Nelson Mandela all used and promoted peace sitins.
ReplyDeleteHIPI!
Delete14-4
Deletei agree because it does not solve issues it just makes them much worse. we can solve problems in many other ways.
25
DeleteI agree, but sometimes, violence is an inevitable and you have to accept this fact.
12. I think that the only reason that people should use violence is if violence is being used against them. I'm not saying that violent solutions are the best and I'm also not saying that nonviolent solutions are always best solutions. What I'm saying is that it depends on the situation you'r in. Like for example Martin Luther king mas trying to stop the violence and he got shot, thats not right because he was protesting for a cause. The only time when i would agree with violence is when you are tryiing to defend yourself from the violence that is tormenting you. Like if someone was trying to hit you or be violent with you then you would have to protect yourself.
ReplyDelete15. People should resist violence because it always leads to more violence. I've never be associated with any kind of physical or verbal violence, but I have seen the drama it has caused. Someone says something, it gets around and a fight happens. As Gandhi said, "An eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world blind." This quote is saying that if everyone is always getting revenge, the violence never stops. When Scout backs away from the fight, she is proving that she is slowly becoming more mature, and understanding that violence doesn't get you anywhere,
ReplyDelete28. However, violence can get rid of common disagreement problems. Violence is not always the problem, but it can be if needed.
Delete17
DeleteI agree that violence leads to more violence, before you know it everyone's punching each other in the face.
LatioSkyShaymin+SuperMarioGalaxy64~
ReplyDeleteNo, a nonviolent approach is not always the solution, but it oftentimes is. A non-violent approach does not harm anyone and it is usually just as if not more effective than a violent one. This is shown in the awe-inspiring non-violent protests of people such as Gandhi, MLK, and Rosa Parks that managed to cause so much to happen. However, at the same time, some people are persistent in causing violence and will not rest until that happens. A very good example is Hitler, for we would not have been able to stop him if we had done things that are non-violent. We should only have to use violence when necessary, never other times.
29
DeleteI agree. This is because so many people have acted with non-violence and have been successful in getting their point across, this shows that we can also be non-violent and make our point clear.
14.6
DeleteI agree that violence is needed on some occasions, but it isn't the right desiccation. If we didn't attack Hitler, what would the future be holding? Pathways of our imagination can only tell.
4-9
ReplyDeleteViolencer is not the answer to any type of conflict. Beating someone into submission does not change their minds, just quiets their opinion. Conversation and showing of reason beat violence any day. However, not everyone thinks this way, and usually this leads to fighting. Being the bigger person and refraining from fighting with fists is hard. It is worth it though. Not everyone knows this, but when you sway someones opinion, this is more fulfilling then winning a brawl. That is my opinion on physical fighting.
7- I agree with you completely. It isn't always easy to stand up to someone, or to just walk away. It takes a big person to do it.
Delete6. People shouldn't always resist violence in all cases at all costs. However, I do feel as if it isn't necessary at all times. I feel this way because, sometimes violence needs to happen in order for a point to get across but verbal action can have equal value. For example, Rosa parks stood up for what she believed in as a proud black sista, without using violence. This changed the world around us as we know it today. Violence doesn't have to happen in order to solve a problem. All in all I feel as if some violence might be needed in some cases but, non violence is the way to go.
ReplyDelete15. I agree with #29, violence can get you in a lot of unwanted trouble.
ReplyDelete22.Even though nonviolent solutions are more preferred, some situations need to be violent to get across to the opposing side. Violent solutions can have some more repercussions; the other person could be seriously injured or you could be injured. An example is that the United States has tried, for years, to stop Osama bin Laden, but nothing would stop him; we resorted to violence and killed him. This stopped some of the problems that were going on, but not all of them. I prefer to use nonviolent solutions, because you have a better chance to compromise with the person that you are against. These solutions can also keep you safe, because you won't have any angry people trying to get revenge . If there is no other way to solve the problem, resort to violence, but always try to stay nonviolent.
ReplyDelete28.In most cases, violence can and should be avoided. However, some "fights" lead to unstoppable violence. Violence can cause casualties and death, but will end an argument for a while. Sure, Nelson Mandela and Gandhi were extremely successful, but war is also. All in all, violence is either or bad, depending on the situation.
ReplyDeleteTo #28
DeleteFrom #27
I believe in your comment above because fights and violence can and should be avoided. It only creates more violence and more "drama" in a way. Exactly, violence is bad or good, depending on a situation.
14.6
DeleteViolence should always be avoided, no matter what. Wars end life, fights end friendship. What else?
13. I think that people shouldn't always resist violence at all cost because sometimes you do need to fight back with more than words. I think this because even if you think that nonviolence is good other people disagree and will use violence. For example MLK promoted nonviolence but people used violence against him. So he of course didn't use violence back but most people do to defend themselves. Defending yourself is one of the most causes for violence because you cant let some one hurt you espically if it's a life and death situation. However sometimes it is the answer. Like Scout her first reaction is to use violence, but sometimes things can be resolved but useing nonviolence, like atticus said. But i think it usally comes down to what the situation brings, and what is right and wronge for the situation.
ReplyDelete25
DeleteI agree, 13. Sometimes, you just can't avoid violence and you have to fight back.
21. I believe that a calm head can keep some situations nice but then again some situations require violence.These situations could be someones way of talking to the other person or the other person just may not listen to your reasoning.A calm head can keep you safe and can make the situation all but disappear.I had problems with a girl once and to stop the drama and the rumors and the idiocy I fought her because she would not listen to reason and was determined to fight me.That situation was soon completely resolved after that and we now talk and hang out with our mutual friends.I do wished we could have solved it with out the violence but it was not happening.
ReplyDelete26. That's understandable, and I agree, some people just refuse to use their minds instead of their fists.
Delete5 I can see your view how it is difficult for some people to use their thinking then fist
Delete25. People should resist violence. Sometimes violence causes accidents that bring bad consequences that can't be erased. Although in some cases violence is good to use, many people choose not to use violence. Ghandi and Martin Luther King are examples of people who promoted non-violent resistence. Sometimes people use violence to protect theirselves, which is good.
ReplyDelete22. I agree with you 12, because I think that each situation is different.
ReplyDelete5 I agree with you 12, because it depends how people handle situations differently
Delete5-
ReplyDeleteI don't think that violence is ever a good solution. I joke around about fighting and violence, but when I'm angry or sad or whatever, I don't wanna fight anyone cause that just makes things worse. If you fight someone and beat them, then they're just gonna get angry and want to fight you again and same for the other way around. Violence also hurts people. Think about wars and how many people have died. People that someone cared about. When you use violence, you're hurting someone that someone cares about. Also, you can use your head to solve things much better than you can use violence to solve things. The human brain is much more capable than fists or guns or anything else.
I agree, but sometimes it might be worth starting a war if what you are fighting against wont veiw your opinion with non-violence.
Delete#10
DeleteI couldn't agree more, actually. Violence always leads to more violence.
I agree with you completely. Starting a war with someone isn't always the best idea.
Delete6.21.
DeleteViolence is sometimes neccesary if there is no other alternative. Like the Boston Tea Party in 1773, violence is sometimes the only way to make aa point.
#7 Period 4
ReplyDeleteI think people should resist violence at all times because it doesn't help any situation. Fighting has never solved anything so why would it now? I think it's pointless to fight anybody over everything. I can't think of one good reason to fight somebody because all in all, you would get in just as much trouble for trying to take something into your own hands. This is just my opinion on fighting,
22. I agree with what you said Keegan, because some people refuse to stop fighting unless it ends with violence.
ReplyDelete26. In my opinion, violence should be a last resort or shouldn't even be a resort if possible. Any one can use their fists and shoot a gun, but it takes intelligence and maturity to slove a situation with clever words and diplomacy. Of coarse this is a two way street. If one side of the situation is being violent, and you need to defend yourself, violence can be used. For example, in WWII if countries didn't fight against what was wrong, our world would be a different, more corrupt place. The act of violence, though, doesn't always have to be used to make a difference. In the cival war, black people couldn't be violent other wise they would just be killed. If violence will deter you from your cause, don't use it. Violence should be only be used if it truely is the last resort, and should be avoided if possible.
ReplyDelete6.21.
DeleteI agree. Violence shouldn't be used unless absolutly required, or not used at all.
#27
ReplyDeletePeople should try to avoid violence at all times because some of the greatest leaders were non-violent like Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr. or Cesar Estrada Chavez. They all had campaigns that changed the world and they were peaceable about their way of changing parts of the Earth. I do not have a personal experience with a non-violence problem because I try to avoid anything to do with violence. Violence should be avoided. If MLK or Gandhi or Cesar involved violence in their promotions, would we have the same rights as we do today?
#10
DeleteI think you have a very good point when you mention the past leaders of our nation. Using violence, or force, could cause the life we're living to be completely different.
24-I don't think violence is acceptable in any way. People think it solves problems but it never does. You can solve things by discussions and debates or even by good-old democracy. You should not bring pain to other humans as other humans should not bring pain to you. People don't have to risk their lives to solve a problem.
ReplyDelete#23
DeleteI do not agree with you because violence IS THE ANSWER! :)
17.6
ReplyDeleteI think people shound try to resist violence. People say that we should have gun control, but its really the people that are commiting these violent acts. People get so angry and they choose to release it with violence. I think people should practice calming themselves while being non violent. I have gotten angry and tried to take out my anger. I ended up destroying half my room. Violence is part of the reason that our world is so corrupt. Increase the peace silence the violence!!! word.
Comp. 25
ReplyDeleteAs awesome as pacifism is, I don't believe that people should try to resist violence every imaginable scenario. Sometimes, there are certain cases where it's near impossible to avoid violent measures. Personally, I don't like the thought of getting in a fight, but if I have to, I will. This doesn't mean that you should go around antagonizing people, however. Non-violent solutions should always be attempted when given the chance, but sometimes, non-violent means aren't always an option
#23
ReplyDeleteNonviolent solutions are not always the best solutions. If someone crosses you, you have to put them in there place so they wont do it again. If you aren't at least a little violent, people will just walk all over you. Some cases you don't need to be violent but some you do.Also, if someone put their hands on you, you hit them back.
#9
DeleteI agree with you, non-violent solutions aren't always the best solutions.
Kitty Langley
ReplyDeleteViolence should try to be avoided in all situations. Scout, who often loses her head when she's taunted, gets into little school scuffles often, but she doesn't realize that displaying violence displays mental weakness. The display of violence shows our enemies that they have found our breaking point. Also, violence leads to more violence! Someone who displays their anger through altercation is encouraging their opponent to become violent as well. Violence, which leads to more violence, leads to injuries, trouble, and tension. Injuries are caused by the flying punches, trouble is stirred with teachers, police, or worse, and tension is created between peers. Violence should try to be avoided at nearly all costs, because all of the outcomes of violence are wicked ones.
#23
DeleteI agree with you, in some cases violence should be avoided but some... shouldn't.
6.21.
DeleteViolence doesn't always lead to wicked outcomes. Look at the Boston Tea Party; Americans destroyed all the tea on the British ships and made a point violently, but the eventual outcome, long off, was the revolution of America from Britain.
24->27 I agree. You should always promote non-violence.
ReplyDeleteComp 5.
ReplyDeletePeople should resist violence in all cases and at all costs because it helps people learn how to deal with everything without being physical. Also it helps us learn to get along with each other. Another thing on using violent solutions to problems help us deal with things that can be difficult not to get physical. So it is hard sometimes not to be violent to difficult situations.
#11
ReplyDeleteViolence should be a last resort or shouldn't even be a resort if possible. In some cases I believe it is optional but that should only be in the case of if your life is in danger. For example MLK promoted nonviolence but people used violence against him. So he of course didn't use violence back then but most people do to defend themselves. In my life I haven't had that much violence in my life. I'm very thankful for that!
12
DeleteI agree with you :)
12.
ReplyDeleteNon-violent solutions are always the best solutions. I don't think that fighting is a good thing, and I don't think it solves any problems. Martin Luther King Jr. didn't use fighting to make his feelings known. He was great at what he did, without hurting anybody. There are many other ways to solve problems besides violence.
#9
DeleteI disagree with you, non-violent solutions aren't always the best solutions.
#9
ReplyDeleteYes, most of the time non-violent solutions are usually the best solutions. In the wars, they usually fight each other violently and they settle things that way. Non-violent solutions don't always settle a situation but sometimes they do. You can either vocally settle something or you can physically settle something. Usually, it's better to work things out non-violently but if it comes to being violent, then that's what it comes to.
12.
DeleteThat is true.. haha :)
I agree with you. Violence doesn't really solve anything, it tends to get worse which something that no one wants.
Delete6.21.
ReplyDeleteI think that violence is not always nessesary. Violence should only be used when absolutly needed, when everything could be lost, like when a government trys to RULE a country instead of GOVERNING it. An example of a non-violent solution is the African-American Civil Rights Movement from '55-'68. The African-Americans did no violence on their part, and they still got what they wanted. On the contrary, sometimes violence is needed. An example is the Boston Tea Party in 1773. Americans borded multiple British ships during the American Revolution. The soldiers destroyed all the tea on the ships, and their point was made to the British. Violence is sometimes needed, but not always. A non-violent solution should always be attempted first, and if it fails, a violent solution may follow.
I agree with you because it think the same thing.
DeleteVery well explained #5.
ReplyDelete#6 I agree with you completely!
13.6
ReplyDelete- I believe that solving problems with violence should always be the last resort. Anyone can
use violence, but it takes a mature person to not solve problems using violence. On the other hand, sometimes violence is needed. For example, in any of the world wars. If nobody stood up with violence the outcome would have changed. Finally, if violence is not needed then it shouldn't be used.
#1
ReplyDeleteI don't understand why people use violence for everything. Yeah, I understand that if someone hit me I would hit back to protect myself , but I would never hit someone first. You can calmly talk about it or just don't talk to each other or about them to other people. If everybody in the world tried to solve everything through violence, this world would be horrible. We would probably be in our third war.. Luckley, there are people who solve things in a more proper manner.
14.6
ReplyDeleteI believe that non violence should be embraced in every situation. I believe this because every violent movement that occurred in the past failed. Fighting sometimes isn't always the best answer because it doesn't solve anything. When Martin Luther King Jr. tried to end the racial acts, he didn't give violence in return to being thrown out of restrooms and bars. Rosa Parks, she is a phenomenal women, who fought back, with her head. People who are reading this may think that she head butted the police officer and won, which in fact she didn't. She out smarted them. Thank you.
#18:
ReplyDeleteI believe that non-violence should be espoused. Violence isn't a good way to solve anything. Actions speak louder than words. Someone can easily do something bad to another person with violence like physically hurting them. Talking things out or walking away from the problem can solve so much more than causing violence.
6.6 I believe physical violence only solves problems temporarily and ends up amplifying the situation over time. As history shows us, nonviolent protests or solutions have almost always worked out in the nonviolent participant's favor. Though it may be harder to be nonviolent, it should always be a primary option when faced with an issue. Personally, I am almost never violent when faced with an issue and most of the time the resolution works in my favor.
ReplyDelete#7
ReplyDeleteNonviolent solutions are only the best solutions in some cases.If someone is just talking to you and is't being violent then not being violent is the best solution.If somebody is being violent with you then it is the best solution to be violent.Violence is also the best solution if somebody is attacking you.In some situations if you don't need to be violent but in other situations you have to be violent to stand up for yourself
per.6/computer#2
ReplyDeleteI personally think that violence only causes more violence. In the book Scout's father told Scout that no matter what people say about him not to get into a fight over it, and it helped Scout because she could have not only have got in trouble but made fun of and frowned upon by her classmates. In my life I learned that violence should be avoided, when my friend had been mad at me, but for something that I was not involved in but he thought I was involved in. He was yelling at me and I could have yelled back, but I decided to stay calm and explain what went down, and it worked. Another reason people should resist violence in all cases and at all costs is we all know what Germany did in WW3. Germany acted in a violence and it resulted into many deaths and many sad occasions. That is why people should resist violence in all cases and at all costs.
#7
ReplyDeleteI agree with you #27 violence is not good