ABSTRACT
Physical, mental, or psychological violence applied to an individual or group has deleterious effects; it can traumatize, debilitate, injure, mutilate, amputate, kill, or annihilate. Violence is commonly understood as a means to achieve something, and discussions often centre on whether it is a justified or unjustified means. The Oxford Dictionary traces the origin of the word ‘violence’ to the Latin violentia, meaning “vehemence, impetuosity, forcibly.” The etymology of the word is somewhat ambivalent: it could derive from vis, meaning ‘force,’ and latus (the perfect participle of fero, meaning ‘to carry’), suggesting a meaning along the lines of “to carry force at or towards.” Alternatively, it could come from vi-o-latus, implying “to carry out something through force.” Here, the force, vis, becomes a subject of dispute, depending on whether it is viewed as an instrument (ablative case) or an object (accusative case). If violence is an instrument, it can be seen as an external device used to implement something without affecting the user or the ‘receiver.’ In such cases, the debate primarily concerns the legitimization of the use of violence. If violence is the object, its use becomes the ‘something’ that is implemented: it affects both the user and the receiver. In other words, both the perpetrator and the victim are subjugated to the violence. Violence then is not an external tool but affects everything: the victim, the perpetrator, and the surroundings.
