What can be a cure or an antidote to violent actions?a)speaking practiceb)wise wordsc)polished languaged)Practice of silenceCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?

EduRev

All Courses

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

Class 12 Exam > Class 12 Questions > What can be a cure or an antidote to violent...

Join the Discussion on the App

What can be a cure or an antidote to violent actions?

a)
speaking practice
b)
wise words
c)
polished language
d)
Practice of silence

Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?

FREE This question is part of

Test: Keeping Quiet- 2

Attempt Test

Attempt this Test

Verified Answer

What can be a cure or an antidote to violent actions?a)speaking pract...

The poem ‘Keeping Quiet’ emphasises the need for quiet introspection and creating a feeling of mutual understanding among human beings. It conveys to us the poet’s philosophy of an exotic moment of silence which will be an antidote to violence, hatred and war.

View all questions of this test

Most Upvoted Answer

What can be a cure or an antidote to violent actions?a)speaking pract...

Introduction:
The issue of violent actions is a complex one, and finding a cure or antidote for it requires a multifaceted approach. While there is no single solution that can completely eradicate violence, the practice of silence can be an effective tool in addressing and preventing violent actions.

The Practice of Silence:
The practice of silence refers to the deliberate act of refraining from verbal or physical expression, and instead, engaging in internal reflection and self-control. Incorporating this practice in various aspects of life can contribute to reducing violent actions in the following ways:

1. Emotional Regulation:
Silence allows individuals to calm their emotions and gain control over impulsive and aggressive tendencies. By creating space for introspection, people can better understand their emotions, identify triggers, and develop healthier ways to manage anger and frustration. This self-awareness and emotional regulation can help prevent violent outbursts.

2. Conflict Resolution:
Engaging in silence during conflicts provides an opportunity for individuals to actively listen, empathize, and understand the perspectives of others. By practicing silence, one can refrain from responding impulsively and instead choose thoughtful and non-violent ways to communicate and resolve disagreements. This can foster empathy, understanding, and promote peaceful resolutions.

3. Cultivating Empathy:
Silence allows individuals to focus on observing and understanding the experiences and emotions of others. By actively listening without judgment, people can develop a deeper sense of empathy. Empathy plays a crucial role in reducing violent actions as it fosters compassion, understanding, and the ability to consider the consequences of one's actions on others.

4. Promoting Non-violent Communication:
The practice of silence encourages individuals to pause and reflect before responding in potentially volatile situations. This pause provides an opportunity to choose words and actions that are non-violent and promote understanding. By consciously cultivating non-violent communication, conflicts can be de-escalated, and violent actions can be prevented.

Conclusion:
While the practice of silence cannot single-handedly eradicate violent actions, it can serve as a valuable tool in addressing and preventing violence. By promoting emotional regulation, conflict resolution, empathy, and non-violent communication, the practice of silence contributes to creating a more peaceful and compassionate society. It is important to recognize that addressing violence requires a comprehensive approach that includes various strategies such as education, social support, and addressing systemic issues.

View all answers Start learning for free

< Previous Question Next Question >

Explore Courses for Class 12 exam

Similar Class 12 Doubts

Modern science has provided us a universal method by which we may study and master any subject. As applied to an art, this method has proved highly successful in the case of music. It has not been applied to language because there was a well fixed method of language study in existence long before modern science was even dreamed of, and that ancient method has held on with wonderful tenacity. The great fault with it is that it was invented to apply to languages entirely different from our own. Latin grammar and Greek grammar were mechanical systems of endings by which the relationships of words were indicated. Of course the relationship of words was at bottom logical, but the mechanical form was the chief thing to be learned. Our language depends wholly (or very nearly so) on arrangement of words, and the key is the logical relationship. A man who knows all the forms of the Latin or Greek language can write it with substantial accuracy; but the man who would master the English language must go deeper, he must master the logic of sentence structure or word relations. We must begin our study at just the opposite end from the Latin or Greek; but our teachers of language have balked at a complete reversal of method, the power of custom and time has been too strong, and in the matter of grammar we are still the slaves of the ancient world. As for spelling, the irregularities of our language seem to have driven us to one sole method, memorizing: and to memorize every word in a language is an appalling task. Our rhetoric we have inherited from the middle ages, from scholiasts, refiners, and theological logicians, a race of men who got their living by inventing distinctions and splitting hairs. The fact is, prose has had a very low place in the literature of the world until within a century; all that was worth saying was said in poetry, which the rhetoricians were forced to leave severely alone, or in oratory, from which all their rules were derived; and since written prose language became a universal possession through the printing press and the newspaper we have been too busy to invent a new rhetoric.Q. Which of the following can be said to be true about languages like Latin and Greek?

View answer

Modern science has provided us a universal method by which we may study and master any subject. As applied to an art, this method has proved highly successful in the case of music. It has not been applied to language because there was a well fixed method of language study in existence long before modern science was even dreamed of, and that ancient method has held on with wonderful tenacity. The great fault with it is that it was invented to apply to languages entirely different from our own. Latin grammar and Greek grammar were mechanical systems of endings by which the relationships of words were indicated. Of course the relationship of words was at bottom logical, but the mechanical form was the chief thing to be learned. Our language depends wholly (or very nearly so) on arrangement of words, and the key is the logical relationship. A man who knows all the forms of the Latin or Greek language can write it with substantial accuracy; but the man who would master the English language must go deeper, he must master the logic of sentence structure or word relations. We must begin our study at just the opposite end from the Latin or Greek; but our teachers of language have balked at a complete reversal of method, the power of custom and time has been too strong, and in the matter of grammar we are still the slaves of the ancient world. As for spelling, the irregularities of our language seem to have driven us to one sole method, memorizing: and to memorize every word in a language is an appalling task. Our rhetoric we have inherited from the middle ages, from scholiasts, refiners, and theological logicians, a race of men who got their living by inventing distinctions and splitting hairs. The fact is, prose has had a very low place in the literature of the world until within a century; all that was worth saying was said in poetry, which the rhetoricians were forced to leave severely alone, or in oratory, from which all their rules were derived; and since written prose language became a universal possession through the printing press and the newspaper we have been too busy to invent a new rhetoric.Q. What has been described as a horrifying task in the passage?

View answer

Modern science has provided us a universal method by which we may study and master any subject. As applied to an art, this method has proved highly successful in the case of music. It has not been applied to language because there was a well fixed method of language study in existence long before modern science was even dreamed of, and that ancient method has held on with wonderful tenacity. The great fault with it is that it was invented to apply to languages entirely different from our own. Latin grammar and Greek grammar were mechanical systems of endings by which the relationships of words were indicated. Of course the relationship of words was at bottom logical, but the mechanical form was the chief thing to be learned. Our language depends wholly (or very nearly so) on arrangement of words, and the key is the logical relationship. A man who knows all the forms of the Latin or Greek language can write it with substantial accuracy; but the man who would master the English language must go deeper, he must master the logic of sentence structure or word relations. We must begin our study at just the opposite end from the Latin or Greek; but our teachers of language have balked at a complete reversal of method, the power of custom and time has been too strong, and in the matter of grammar we are still the slaves of the ancient world. As for spelling, the irregularities of our language seem to have driven us to one sole method, memorizing: and to memorize every word in a language is an appalling task. Our rhetoric we have inherited from the middle ages, from scholiasts, refiners, and theological logicians, a race of men who got their living by inventing distinctions and splitting hairs. The fact is, prose has had a very low place in the literature of the world until within a century; all that was worth saying was said in poetry, which the rhetoricians were forced to leave severely alone, or in oratory, from which all their rules were derived; and since written prose language became a universal possession through the printing press and the newspaper we have been too busy to invent a new rhetoric.Q. Which of the following can be said to be true about languages like Latin and Greek?

View answer

Sir how can i practice to my english question answer class 12th for board exam?