this post was submitted on 10 Apr 2024
11 points (66.7% liked)

No Stupid Questions

43041 readers
1089 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

In the 19th century sword and gun duel were not that rare, think about Mathematician's Gallois death for example, it seems to be a thing of the past as the last duel occurred in the late 60's.

Politics also used to be pretty violent, with fascist leagues in the 30's and even after the war tons of pretty violent fight between political activist in the 60's and various armed group including full terrorist groups (RAF, ETA and more).

Without saying that today world is peaceful and today politics is "nice diplomacy" things seems pretty laid back simply compared to our parent era and let alone the 19th century.

I would have expected that people would take advantage of modern medicine to be more violent. A duel, or a street fight between political opponent would be way more survivable than it was 100 years ago, so how comes these stuff seems mostly from the past ?

top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 39 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The two aren't correlated in that way because nobody is thinking to themselves "I want to inflict an amount of damage commensurate with what can be treated by modern medicine". If things have devolved to violence, the goal is probably to kill the other.

Politics gets more dangerous as tensions rise in a country. It has nothing to do with what injuries people think can be recovered from. Also we as a society have mostly decided that violence isn't a good way of solving political disputes. A duel doesn't tell you who is right, only who is left.

And let's not forget, duelling always carries a risk of death. Nobody is thinking in terms of "oh don't worry, as long as they get me to a hospital quick enough I'll be fine", because a bullet to the heart or head is still a killing blow.

[–] gimpchrist@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Pain hurts and people avoid that

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

way more survivable than it was 100 years ago

Threat assessment, in a nutshell. Back then you could be relatively sure you were evaluating the threat level of any encounter fairly accurately. You could tell if your target was far more privileged than you, deadly weapons were reasonably obvious. These days you have no way of knowing whether your target has immediate access to deadly weaponry, an unseen group of potential reinforcements via socials, or if law enforcement will be able to investigate and prosecute your actions whether there are witnesses or not.

Clarifying edit: I answered in the spirit of speculation, allowing the premise for the sake of conversation.

[–] ironhydroxide@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 year ago

I think it stems more from the correlation between modern medicine and modern weaponry.

A duel would be difficult with swords, and yes you could be cut badly but more bruised and possibly broken bone.

A duel with guns, yeah you dead.

[–] capital_sniff@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You aren't accounting for the increase in cool stuff that makes people want to stick around longer. There's at least one more Dune movie coming and even a Rebel Moon for the Snyder people. When dueling was popular people were going to church for fun... If you believe in an afterlife and most of your time is spent peasanting about, why not have some fun in a duel?

[–] Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

I love the idea of people who would REALLY want to be in a duel, but don't want to risk it just in case Half Life 3 gets released.

[–] kinsnik@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Even if people were thinking “i want to just harm someone in a way that they can still make a full recovery”, modern medicine also tells us much more about ptsd and other mental health issues that can happen from violence. So even if the while premise of “let’s get violent, they can heal” was true, it would still lead to less violence

[–] I_Fart_Glitter@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Give it about 300 more years....

[–] xePBMg9@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I wager the reason why people are not dueling each other, to solve their differences today, is that they simply have more options in how they go about it. I don't think the survival rate of stab wounds factor in to the decision at all. We have a more accommodating legal system to turn to. One that serves more people than ever.

On another note. If you have to pay for your own medical cost and you live in a place like the USA; then you would probably want to die. If you live in a more civilised pace, then your fellow citizens will pay for your treatment and then promptly lock you up for wasting taxpayer money and endangering yourself and others, like a crazy person.