Morality of violence

In ethics, questions regarding the morality of violence ask under what conditions, if any, the use of violence can be morally justified. Three prominent views on the morality of violence are (1) the pacifist position, which states that violence is always immoral, and should never be used; (2) the utilitarian position, which states that violence can be used if it brings about a net "good" for society; (3) a hybrid of these two views which both looks at what good comes from the use of violence, while also examining the types of violence used.^[1]

Christian theologians have traditionally argued against the morality of violence, arguing that Christians should love their enemies as well as their friends.^[2] Benito Mussolini often spoke about the morality of violence, arguing that violence was moral, and that it had spiritual importance as an expression of human will.^[3]

See also

• Anarchism and violence
• Paradox of tolerance

References

1. Rapoport, David C. & Alexander, Yonah, eds. (1989). The Morality of terrorism: religious and secular justifications. Columbia University Press. p. 383. ISBN 978-0-231-06752-2.
2. Pottenger, John R. (1989). The political theory of liberation theology: toward a reconvergence of social values and social science. SUNY Press. p. 146. ISBN 978-0-7914-0118-7.
3. Kallis, Aristotle A. (2000). Fascist ideology: territory and expansionism in Italy and Germany, 1922-1945. Psychology Press. p. 39. ISBN 978-0-415-21611-1.

Further reading

• Coady, C.A.J. (2008). Morality and political violence. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-70548-6.
• Steger, Manfred B. & Lind, Nancy S., eds. (1999). Violence and its alternatives: an interdisciplinary reader. Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-0-312-22151-5.