Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.

[Red Stranger]

What does the quote "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent." by Isaac Asimov mean? Does it mean that the competent would use violence as an earlier resort or that the competent will not use violence?

 

[JonnyB]

I assume it means that people resort to violence when they're not smart enough to find a better solution.

 

[Irish Caesar]

It means that the competent have better ways of solving problems than violence.

 

[Mr. Dictator]

What does the quote "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent." by Isaac Asimov mean? Does it mean that the competent would use violence as an earlier resort or that the competent will not use violence?

it means only the incompetent start a war without trying negotiations first.

 

[CaptainF]

it means only the incompetent start a war without trying negotiations first.

I really don't think thats what it means, considering it never says war.

 

[Irish Caesar]

I really don't think thats what it means, considering it never says war.

Well, it does mean that, as one application, but it's a great deal broader of a statement than simply applying to starting wars.

 

[Birdjaguar]

It is from the Foundation series. It was part of, IIRC, a philosophy of dealing with threats. I think it was referencing their own actions and that in order for their group to fulfill its destiny they had to be smart enough to avoid being destroyed by hasty action or poor judgement.
EDIT: The foundation was a tiny seed from a dying empire and the seed was planned to eventually replace the empire, to do that the foundation had to survive the transition and grow to dominance over hundreds (thousands?) of years. The generations that guided the foundation has to survive until they becane the new empire. [that's all I remember of the story]

In a broader context, I think it assumes that violence is bad and only the if you let things get to that point you have misplayed your hand or made bad decisions leading up to the point where violence is considered a solution.

 

[Ecclesiastes]

What if an incompetant person in his incompetance attacks a competant person, and the said person defends back?Was he not competant to begin with, or mayby hes competant for fighting back, some would say hes stupid if he didnt fight back, but this guy says hes dumb for fighting?

Actually, who the hell decides who is competant?Is it just the not violent people, in that case, my three year old brother is very competant. My point Im trying to make here is that I disagree with the statement, we live in a hateful and violent world. While were at it, we might as well have a discussion about the said quote.

 

[Brighteye]

What does the quote "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent." by Isaac Asimov mean? Does it mean that the competent would use violence as an earlier resort or that the competent will not use violence?

Someone has already explained the context. Taken out of context it is completely wrong. Violence is usually the last option for the competent; the incompetent will use it too early or not at all.

 

[Bast]

War and violence are two different things.

You can have a war without violence. Cold War? You need a lot of competence to wage a successful war.

You don't need competence to punch a man in the face.

 

[PrinceOfLeigh]

What does the quote "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent." by Isaac Asimov mean? Does it mean that the competent would use violence as an earlier resort or that the competent will not use violence?

Sure does. I'm not going to give an educated and eloquent line of reasoning as to why a Dwarf should give me back my car keys. Just lamp the fella and drive home.

 

[Riffraff]

In the book the comment (as far as I can remember) meant that the incompetent leadership is eventually forced into using violence, whereas the competent leadership stays clear of it.

 

[Enkidu Warrior]

War and violence are two different things.

You can have a war without violence. Cold War? You need a lot of competence to wage a successful war.

You don't need competence to punch a man in the face.

The Cold War killed millions.

 

[Bast]

The Cold War killed millions.

You can kill people without violence.

 

[Enkidu Warrior]

You can kill people without violence.

I suppose you can also carpet bomb without violence?

 

[Bast]

I suppose you can also carpet bomb without violence?

I'm not going to respond to your flaming, if you have issues go start another thread.

War and violence are two different things, go check a dictionary.

Good night.

 

[HannibalBarka]

You can kill people without violence.

No you can't. The simple act of killing is violence

 

[Swedishguy]

You can kill people without violence.

My sense of logic cries out loud: ''NO!''

 

[BasketCase]

What does the quote "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent." by Isaac Asimov mean? Does it mean that the competent would use violence as an earlier resort or that the competent will not use violence?

Often, it's a veiled form of, for lack of a better word, flaming.

A lot of people don't comprehend why other people think differently than they do. People in that first group are therefore naturally going to think that the people in the second group must have a few figurative loose screws.

And so, when confronted with dissenting opinions, various forms of mental malfunction are attributed. It's common with gay rights activists, for example: when confronted with anti-gay activists, the pro-gay activists go "what are those people afraid of???"

 

[Enkidu Warrior]

I'm not going to respond to your flaming, if you have issues go start another thread.

War and violence are two different things, go check a dictionary.

Good night.

Of course war and violence are different things, that's very different to your earlier claim that war can occur without violence.

If pointing out that you were flat wrong to say that the Cold War was not violent is flaming, then I would suggest that our understandings of the English language are very different.