First day of discussion!!

Anytime I start a new class I am always nervous about what the class dynamic will be like, especially in a discussion based course such as the one we are taking. That's why today's vibrant discussion shocked and surprised me. I was thrilled that there were so many other students eager to particapte in the discussion. I have found that in college the classes that I learn the most from are those that are discussion based. However when no one in the class wants to "chime in" or no one is doing the reading it turns into a lecture course. However the opposite happened today and it made for an interesting hour and a hlaf.
In todays class we discuussed the very fine line between violence and nonviolence. There were many different areas of anaylsis that were looked at in the discussion, however one interested me more than the rest; the relationship between the "opressor" and the "victim." When trying to define violence I feel that one of the most important aspects is the realtionship that is shared between those invovled. As Gorge Coe stated, the line between violence and nonviolence is unclear, however I believe that one could use the relationship of the different parties at the table to help determine whether or not an act should be considered violent. In class we discussed the act of a mother yelling at her child to get him to stop playing in the street, the action of yelling can be consider violent, however the mothers intent was to promote the welfare of the child. Also because it is a mother who is by nature supposed to protect her child the cirrcumstnaces change. The question that was looming over me all of class was; is it wrong for someone to commit an act that could be perceived as violent by thier society if it lies within the bounds of thier natural duty?