The problem is that our hearts and souls are pretty permanently anchored in current convenions to bodies. This is an unforetunate and arbitrary way of doing things. It precipitates huge amounts of unnecessary worry and toil and endless reams of traffic that could be used to better purposes. But it is how things work down here.

Given that, the premise seems to be that there is a threshold of interaction which when it gets violated justifies shifting gears down from communication into force and control. Talk as long as you can, according to this school of thought, but in the presence of excessive force, major physical assaults, etc., direct all your resources into assuring your own survival. Of course those resources can include heart and soul. But it seems to be a common thread that we believe that when we get pushed too far we have to resort to force to restore basic order.

I've run into this on a few occasions with individuals, and I imagine we all have. There is a level of insanity in an individual where communication has to be stepped down to just basic control.

Any mother knows there are lots of ways to impose control without resorting to phsyical violence. I guess these options dwindle in the face of hard weapons like exploding fuel and AK47s.

If an individual came at me with intent to kill me with a boxcutter, I think I would take him down if I could and take him out if I had to. If I could I would try to get him incapacitated without killing him. But I would want to be above all else effective in preserving my own life.

ANd I think this thinking extends, rightly or wrongly, to group dynamics.

A