Nonviolence and Rationality

[Mark_W]

From the standpoint of simple justice, I believe that everyone has equal right to life, as do most people. On the other hand, most people say there are exceptions to this principle. For example, if a person is considered dangerous and we suspect that they may kill someone, then we say it becomes justified to kill that person in the name of defense. This is the opposite stance of saying every person has the same right to life, because it is claiming that, in certain circumstances, we should take away someone’s life, after we have just stated that we have no right to do this.

It is irrational for two reasons, first because we can never know for certain whether the act of violence we are trying to prevent is lesser or greater than the act of violence we are choosing to resort to. In other words we are willing to commit an act of violence now, based on preventing a supposed act of violence in the future which might not have happened at all. Secondly, it is irrational because of the equal right of every human to life, we have no right to assume that one person belongs in this world and not another. It seems clear enough now, yet this is a contradiction which I’ve noticed most people try to live with, or at least try not to think about.
If you wish to comment, I would appreciate any response.