this post was submitted on 01 Mar 2024
1358 points (100.0% liked)

196

16501 readers
2820 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (36 children)

Peaceful and non-violent are synonyms….

You also contradict yourself as well. You say to be non-violent, then you say you can’t be peacefully disruptive… those contradict each other.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 8 months ago (29 children)

No, they aren't. You must be disruptive, which isn't peaceful.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (28 children)

How can you be non-violent and not peaceful at the same time…? lmfao. They mean the exact same thing.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Hmm I see what the dictionaries are saying but (using an example from above) I think argument exists that:

If me and my fellow protestors block a road, we are being non-violent, but we are not being peaceful.

But it's Friday and no time for argument!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

What’s not peaceful about blocking a road?

The argument falls apart when you ask for the difference lol.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Peaceful: freedom from disturbance; tranquility.

It is a disturbance to the system, and it isn't tranquil. They are not synonyms. Non-violent means you aren't hurting anyone, peaceful means you aren't disturbing anything. You can't be violent and peaceful but you can be non-violent and non-peaceful. Peace is sufficient but not necessary for non-violence.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

Literally the next definition after that one….

not involving war or violence.

SYNONYMS…

Peaceful literally means non-violent…. Literally defines the bloody term lmfao.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

the next definition

So, overlapping meanings, not synonyms

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

They are both, one is defined by other, AND they are synonyms.

Isn’t language fucked up?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

One definition of peaceful is synonymous, and one isn't. This is exactly why language has so many synonyms, each one is sliiiightly different. Choosing one intentionally instead of another is important.

In this instance, "peace" is being defined (not directly, but through context) as status quo, going about your day unhindered. "Violence" is being defined as causing direct physical harm to a person, and possibly property depending on who you ask.

With these definitions laid out, it's easy enough to see a situation that is not violent (no one got hurt at all) and also not peaceful (some people's days were interrupted) - one person mentioned blocking a road. This is a FANTASTIC example of non-peaceful non-violent protest. No one likes a pedant.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

No one likes a pedant.

Goes on a bloviated pedantic rant…

Yep, just like the people trying to say blocking a road isn’t peaceful. They are trying to pedantically choose a definition to make a point. Blocking a road is absolutely peaceful, trying to explain it any other way would be to be pendantic. Lmfao.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

I see a lot of other people have responded with examples and argument.

So I'll disagree and say the argument falls apart when I don't argue. (Cause it's Friday. You ain't got no job. You ain't got shit to do. I'm gonna get you high today.)

load more comments (26 replies)
load more comments (26 replies)
load more comments (32 replies)