Go back
Vengeance

Vengeance

Spirituality

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
Clock
24 May 21

Is vengeance ever a right response to something?

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
Clock
24 May 21

I think if victims view the punishment [within the framework of morally sound concepts of justice] meted out to the person who committed a crime against them as being a form of vengeance for them, I see it as legitimate.

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
Clock
24 May 21

But never for thoughtcrimes, no.

And if it is carried out in secret, and therefore is not a deterrent.

Or if it's just some kind of sadistic or disproportional kind of violent retribution, then I can't see how it could ever be seen as morally coherent.

bunnyknight
bunny knight

planet Earth

Joined
12 Dec 13
Moves
2917
Clock
24 May 21
Vote Up
Vote Down

@fmf said
Is vengeance ever a right response to something?
A very interesting topic.
Vengeance is a perfectly natural reaction to an action. It can be seen as the great balancer, or negative feedback in society.
Let's say my son gets tortured by a school bully, but never fights back by smashing his face. That bully will go on to torture other kids or even rape your daughter. But if my son had smashed his face, that action would have prevented countless future innocents from getting victimized.

Meanwhile governments and leaders generally hate the concept of revenge because it threatens their ability to abuse its citizens.

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
Clock
24 May 21

@bunnyknight said
Meanwhile governments and leaders generally hate the concept of revenge because it threatens their ability to abuse its citizens.
It might be interesting if you expand upon this.

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
Clock
24 May 21

@bunnyknight said
Let's say my son gets tortured by a school bully, but never fights back by smashing his face. That bully will go on to torture other kids or even rape your daughter. But if my son had smashed his face, that action would have prevented countless future innocents from getting victimized.
Aside from retribution or revenge [are they exactly synonymous when talking in philosophical terms?] punishment - when exacted justly - is also arguably about deterrence, the protection of society [incapacitation], restitution and rehabilitation.

In your scenario, your son smashing his bully's face may deter future torturing of your son by that bully but there wouldn't necessarily be any wider benefits for other people [potential victims of that bully or, indeed, other bullies.

divegeester
watching in dismay

STARMERGEDDON

Joined
16 Feb 08
Moves
120597
Clock
24 May 21

@bunnyknight said
Let's say my son gets tortured by a school bully, but never fights back by smashing his face. That bully will go on to torture other kids or even rape your daughter. But if my son had smashed his face, that action would have prevented countless future innocents from getting victimized.
The example you give is actually self defence. Vengeance would be if the bully stopped bullying or perhaps moved away and your son tracked him down to exact retribution.

bunnyknight
bunny knight

planet Earth

Joined
12 Dec 13
Moves
2917
Clock
24 May 21

@fmf said
It might be interesting if you expand upon this.
The natural temptation of leaders is power and wealth. As they acquire its addictive taste they start to take and take, and if this greed is not kept in check they will keep taking until the lives of citizens are so bad that chaos and violence erupts. When people get no justice and have nothing more to lose, they resort to pure revenge, and one thing the leaders really hate and fear is people blowing stuff up or causing unrest because if the social order collapses, their source of wealth and power is threatened.

Meanwhile the leaders are free to destroy human lives under the cloak of a billion laws and regulations mostly made to benefit them.

In the end, the main point is this: If you hate revenge, then don't engage in any sort of injustice.

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
Clock
24 May 21

@bunnyknight said
The natural temptation of leaders is power and wealth. As they acquire its addictive taste they start to take and take, and if this greed is not kept in check they will keep taking until the lives of citizens are so bad that chaos and violence erupts.
[leaders in power...] start to take and take

Are you talking about taxes?

bunnyknight
bunny knight

planet Earth

Joined
12 Dec 13
Moves
2917
Clock
26 May 21

@fmf said
[leaders in power...] start to take and take

Are you talking about taxes?
Yes, taxes are certainly one method. They start off reasonable and fair, then keep increasing to as much as possible until people rebel. For example, many people have been thrown out of their mortgage-free homes simply because they couldn't afford to pay absurd property taxes any longer. Meanwhile in some places over 70 percent of school property taxes were simply unaccounted for -- vanished into thin air.
But there are many other methods to gouge and rob citizens, such as 20,000 dollar per year health care premiums; or arresting them on trivial victimless charges, then sticking them with huge fines, fees and asset confiscation.

And if that's not enough to send a normal person into a mad vengeful rage, throw in some alcohol and drugs, and you have a recipe for disaster.

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
Clock
26 May 21
1 edit

@bunnyknight said
Yes, taxes are certainly one method. They start off reasonable and fair, then keep increasing to as much as possible until people rebel. For example, many people have been thrown out of their mortgage-free homes simply because they couldn't afford to pay absurd property taxes any longer. Meanwhile in some places over 70 percent of school property taxes were simply unaccounted for -- vanished into thin air.
What form of vengeance do you personally believe is morally justified in response to what you feel are excessive property taxes and health care premiums [for example]?

bunnyknight
bunny knight

planet Earth

Joined
12 Dec 13
Moves
2917
Clock
27 May 21

@fmf said
What form of vengeance do you personally believe is morally justified in response to what you feel are excessive property taxes and health care premiums [for example]?
Personally, I would simply refuse to participate in the great injustice until it kills me. Then after I'm dead I would assume that your reaction to my death would be to violently kill everyone responsible for that injustice, and spare future innocents from the same death I suffered. If not, then the injustice will continue. In either case the universe won't care, just like it doesn't care when a hurricane kills 1000 children. Laws of nature and laws of physics will always prevail, no matter what you and I imagine 'morality' to be.

F

Joined
28 Oct 05
Moves
34587
Clock
27 May 21
Vote Up
Vote Down

@bunnyknight said
Personally, I would simply refuse to participate in the great injustice until it kills me.
I think the punishment for not paying tax would at first be fines and if you didn't pay them and the overdue taxes, I think you would be imprisoned. I can't see how you would get executed for it.

R
Standard memberRemoved

Joined
03 Jan 13
Moves
13080
Clock
27 May 21
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

@fmf said
Is vengeance ever a right response to something?
Good question.

Related are two that I have.

1.) Who has the ultimate authority to balance the scales of justice should there be an imbalance?

2.) Is there ever such a thing as forgiveness which is unrighteous?

My answers would be (including the first question)

1.) Vengeance could be the appropriate response to something.

2.) The ultimate Governor, Creator and Moral Authority - God, alone has the final right and responsibility to set in balance an imbalance in the scales of justice.

That is why He says "Vengeance is Mine, says the Lord. I will repay." (Deuteronomy 32:35; Romans 12:19)

3.) There could be forgiveness which is unrighteous. I think there could be a form of forgiveness which is not right and itself a crime. An overly liberal and sloppy permissive "forgiveness" could itself be a crime - a forgiveness which is unrighteous.

There could be a forgiveness which encourages the forgiven one to all the more double down on doing evil. That could be a form of unrighteous forgiveness imo.

divegeester
watching in dismay

STARMERGEDDON

Joined
16 Feb 08
Moves
120597
Clock
28 May 21
1 edit

@sonship said
Good question.

Related are two that I have.

1.) Who has the ultimate authority to balance the scales of justice should there be an imbalance?

2.) Is there ever such a thing as forgiveness which is unrighteous?

My answers would be (including the first question)

1.) Vengeance could be the appropriate response to something.

2.) The ultimate Gov ...[text shortened]... lone has the final right and responsibility to set in balance an imbalance in the scales of justice.
Whilst this post by may appear a typical “sonship” one-shoe-down-waiting-for-the-next-to-drop T-up for a self response, I think poking through it reveals your contorted view of God’s nature as described through the bible and also how your own moral compass has become broken because of it.

For example, you assert through your own Q&A that God is power and power is might and God can do what he wants and if he wants to be vengeful then he can.

What a pleasant multi-headed god you have there!

You also go on to assert that there is an “unrighteous forgiveness”, a term and concept which appears nowhere in the bible so is straight out of your book of made-up philosophies and truths and no doubt underpins the abhorrent teaching that your version of Jesus wants to tell non Christians that he will burn them alive for eternity in order to demonstrate how much he loves them and hopefully attract them to him.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.