"Words Are Sometimes More Powerful and Dangerous Than Weapons and Physical Violence" Joseph Conrad

467 Words2 Pages
Words are sometimes more powerful and dangerous than weapons and physical violence. Do you agree ? As a general rule, we are used to think that as long as we talk, there is no danger of physical violence. But it sometimes happens that we suffer more from words than from a blow. In this respect, it is interesting to ask oneself to what point words are more powerful and dangerous than physical violence and weapons. On the one hand, they of course seem to prevent from physical violence, but on the other hand, they sometimes lead to it, and even then there is no physical violence, they have a power on their own. First at all, it cannot be denied that words don’t replace action. Indeed, they have no direct consequence. For example, say “I will kill you” doesn’t kill anybody. In this way, words don’t seem more powerful and dangerous than action. Besides, words seem to can contain the violence, since they afford negotiation. Indeed, they sometimes prevent the use of weapons and physical violence. Let us take the example of the Second World War, where negotiations between Americans and Japaneses prolonged until 7th December 1941. As long as we talk, the violence doesn’t takes place. We can thus think that it is the lack of communication, the lack of words, which lead to violence. But, whether some words, which contain the violence, it seems that some of them can drive to it. As a matter of fact, there is a kind of speech, which provoke weapons’ s use. They have a power of persuasion, but they also can fool somebody. In this way, they are means of manipulation, and can lead to action. Here, we can think about all fanatical speeches, all appeals to violence, the Jihad’s call for example. Words can thus become dangerous. But it seems that danger of words also lie in their ability to say the unreal, to say what it is not, and by this way, to create illusion.
Open Document