|
Regarding the quote from Asimov: "Violence is the last resort of the incompetent.":
This is ambiguous, but clearly not always true.
If someone is incompetent at violence, then one would hope and expect it to be their last choice, as they will bet their butts kicked.
Perhaps someone competent would not have waited until “last resort” to try violence. It is much less effective when the opponent knows it’s coming, which implies that you launch your attack while there still appear to be other choices.
If one is poor at negotiation but very good at fighting, then tending to violence in chaotic conflict situations may simply be maximizing success. This may be reprehensible, but is not “incompetent”.
Perhaps if someone is known as skilled at fighting, others do not push them to violence, thus the incompetent do end up fighting more, but not by choice.
Paraphrasing Samuel Clemens “Everyone is incompetent, just in different spots”. Not all incompetence leads to violence.
People who are very competent at violence do not always resort to violence more than average. The restraint of highly skilled black belts is well known. On the other hand, people who are bullies generally are more formidable than average. I conclude that surprisingly, it’s not competence in battle that causes one to choose that by preference.
|