Why is violence a solution for kids?

[theloneassassin]

So Escapist, have you ever noticed how so many peoples response is i am going to kick his ass? Or this or that, do people not realize that in real life things don't work like that! Let's here some of your stories about kids saying or doing or thinking stupid things.

 

[2012 Wont Happen]

I know someone who constantly expresses desire to kill another person.

Though, in fairness to him, everybody (jocks, preps, punks, goths, emos, gangsters, nerds, hackers, ect.) wishes the person he wants to take out would just disappear.

edit-

Oh, as to why:

Part of it is probably the underdeveloped brains. The rest, a combination of a lack of real world experience and hormones.

 

[Ultrajoe]

Because they think it hurts more than official, legal, financial or bureaucratic ball-kickings.

People get more brutal as they become more educated, not the other way around.

 

[Dark Knifer]

Firstly, it's not just kids, everyone at least contemplates violence to solve their problems.

Secondly, it's straight forward, you can see the benefit and simple to execute. The difference between adults thinking about committing violence and kids that they are usually more in tune with the possible consequences for it.

 

[theloneassassin]

I am just so sick of people acting like bashing someones skull in would solve anything... unless that person is like seriously sick to animals and human beings.

 

[TonyVonTonyus]

Violence should be kept to the neccesary amount. If someone needs a good ass kicking or indeed gives me reason enough to I'll open a family sized can of whoop ass on him. Violence is sometimes bad but other times very neccesary.

 

[Irridium]

Because they think it hurts more than official, legal, financial or bureaucratic ball-kickings.

People get more brutal as they become more educated, not the other way around.

What he said.

If I could replace all my financial woes and whatnot with a simple, physical ass-kicking, I would.

 

[Aur0ra145]

In the younger stages of life people are constantly trying to become the idol of their surroundings. Generally in nature and human society the most successful and well looked upon individuals are those which take on attributes which make them better than others. The most basic of these characteristics is that of physical superiority over another.

When looking into nature there is a constant fight between males in a group to become the alpha and leader of all. This can be directly correlated to people. But people also have sentiments within themselves which they believe than can exude via benevolence or justice. Benevolence in modern society (like at a high school) though well looked upon, seems to be a detriment when considering leadership of a group. Though if one can extract justice from a situation and cause others to be put into place, they are perceived to show a higher degree of worth (according the the surroundings commonly found in high schools.)

The utility of benevolence is widespread but is given equally to all when properly applied, while if justice is severed to someone it directly benefits only the group on the lawful (perceived as correct) side. Through the fragmentation of different groups it is easier to associate power and utility with those who can dominate another. Think of how and 'enforcer' is more feared and a better asset than a 'monk' who treats all individuals the same and takes all punishments and detriments along side their praises on benevolence.

Is this a consequence of moral relativism or something deeper? Is 'self-love' and 'benevolence' not as strong a feeling as 'justice'? Is 'self-love' such a strong feeling that we overlook 'benevolence' and just straight to 'justice' when deciding how to act upon a problem?

Is it a problem with distance to an party which determines which way we will act? Should I be more concerned about people in Africa dying or my best friend dying? Is it even morally correct to feel differently about different individuals dying?


Yeah, I'm in the middle of writing an essay about David Hume and "An Enquiry Concerning the Principle of Morals."

Oh and this. for laughs.

Spoiler

 

[godfist88]

no, because they're kids. and most kids don't have the mental capacity for these type of situations beyond either:

1: cause trouble.

or

2: tell on those who did.

 

[BlindMessiah94]

I don't think this is specific to kids. I hear 30 year old men say the same stuff all the time because as time has gone on their negative attitude has most likely attracted bad situations, reinforcing their beliefs. And now years later, they are bitter, jaded, and convinced they are right and everyone else is an idiot that deserves to get the crap kicked out of them or something.

 

[Johnnyallstar]

Violence is in our animal nature, and often an easy action to take. Also, it can be quite effective.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Violence is the quick easy answer for when you are frustrated by something, it's no wonder it's popular.

 

[emeraldrafael]

So Escapist, have you ever noticed how so many peoples response is i am going to kick his ass? Or this or that, do people not realize that in real life things don't work like that!

They dont? Thats rather funny, fighting a WBC member who was tearing into my gay friend sure solved things a lot quicker then talking. In fact, its actualy solved a lot more things then talking has.

Anyway, I would say in America its easy cause you arent punished as easily any more. Plus the image of those we look up to has changed. People wnat to live the thug life, or look cool, and those they want to impress live on that basis. So is all about how the culture views itself.

 

[mireko]

Rage from misspelling, I guess.

[sub]The dyslectic fury, I believe they call it.[/sub]

 

[Plurralbles]

me up until I became 13.

I was shy as hell, had few friends, and couldn't articulate very well so resulted in punching to get people to understand that I was upset.