Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Do you really want to delete this prezi?
Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.
Make your likes visible on Facebook?
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.
Transcript of Tok Presentation
Real Life situation
Toledo Blade, Feburary 14th, 1969
FLQ = radical, separatist and terrorist group
Feburary 13th 1969
Montreal Stock Exchange.
27 people injured
Study of human kind
Uses observation as a way of knowing
Some societies are more violent than others, to the extent of some being almost completely pacifistic
How can anthropology help us in knowing when violence is justifiable?
Possible Flaws in Conclusion
Relies on reason (apply logic) only
Can be difficult to combine with emotion
Violence is common in most societies, and very prevalent in some
Not a necessary feature of every society
Cannot justify violence as a natural part of human nature, but neither can dismiss it as unnatural.
Level of tolerance to violence
Relies on interpretation to make a claim
One society viewing another
Does not always translate easily
Subject to bias
-different branches of history
How can history help us in knowing when violence is justifiable?
Flaws in Conclusion
"Toledo Blade - Google News Archive Search." Toledo Blade - Google News Archive Search. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Apr. 2014.
How do we know when violence can be justified?
Limits of Knowledge Question
Concept of violence can be different:
- times in history
Branch of philosophy
Study of morality
How can ethics help us in knowing when violence is justifiable?
2007 - around 43,500 people of the indigenous Semai tribe in Malay Peninsula
No use of violence
Murders and suicides are rare
Disputes solved in large meetings
Will often flee imposters
Have been known to translate the word "hit" as "kill"
No police or courts
Yanomami live on the boarder between Brazil and Venezuela
Violence exaggerated in the media (Yanomami: The Fierce People) they do have a violent culture
Warring between tribes
Targeting of children in wartime
Possible Flaws in conclusion
moral when creates most good for most people
Has achieved this idea from reason
Flaw = scapegoat clause
CONCLUSION : Violence can be justified
- conformity (or not) to obligations or rules.
- motives of person
Opposition to consequentialism
- end justifies the means
CONCLUSION : Intentions behind violence
1. Effectiveness of violence
2- Physical victory = victory for ideology.
3- impacts line of thoughts
because it brings
Important significance shaping the political world of today
E.g. The american civil war
CONCLUSION DRAWN FROM POLITICAL HISTORY :
- Political History
- Social History
AOK-WOK TO EXPLORE KI
Religious belief systems
Possible Flaw In Conclusion
Other Real Life situations
Killing of Osama Bin Laden
Considered Justified by many Americans
Investigation did not include epistemology of minorities (women, different ethnicities.)
Difficult to take into account different premisses to violent actions;
Did not take into account the emotional state of people while carrying out the violent actions
Reason as WOK to determine what is right/wrong
Creation of moral knowledge
Real Life situation
Bombings of the FLQ :
- level of violence exceeded the tolerance level
-Sovereignty and freedom from oppression
Violence has been part of the past and contributed to shape our world of today
Reason : evaluate violent events according to their branch's focus
THANK YOU FOR LISTENING!
- Everyday life of ordinary people
- Does not focus on violence
CONCLUSION DRAWN FROM SOCIAL HISTORY
- Very similar to anthropology
- according to one's society
Historians subject to other bias
Behavior involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something'
As long as the level of violence does not extend past the level of tolerance in that society
that it is possible to reason out why violence was used (eg. commonly held value, noble goal..)
violence can be justified
Violence is justifiable if we can use reason to explain why it is morally right
Violence is justifiable if it does not exceed the level of acceptable violence known intuitively to that society
Violence is justifiable if we can use reason to explain how it has brought historical change
Irish Republican army
Terrorist attacks against the English
Commonly held value
Acceptable level of violence
Us as Knowers
- Society has low level of tolerance for violence
- Bias for political history
-Surprised by reactions to the
-High level of tolerance for violence