In Rory Miller's books about violence we see descriptions of 'social violence' v. 'asocial violence'....
We can see each type as a 'box' ...i.e., the box of 'social violence' and the box of 'asocial violence'_
Rory points out that unless we understand what these definitions mean and where these types of violence reside in people and what we need to do and where to go ...to deal with it_ our structural defense mechanism from a martial arts practice is somewhat limited.
As Rory points out_ the first objective is to try to avoid …defuse and disappear when all possible…even if it sticks in our craw_ as win or lose…the unintended consequences will cripple us in many ways.
But then there is a time when we will have no other choice but engage.
Here, I believe Rory makes the point that_ not understanding the nature of violence_ we may proceed on the faulty belief that we can reason with 'asocial violence' types …which leads to denial_ reactive delays giving the potential assailant the initiative so we can 'block and counter' _ as well as giving up the time tested survival response actions…i.e., speed, ruthless delivery of a force continuum with a view to short stop the attacker, debilitate him, and render him unable to carry out his intentions.
The understanding of the nature of violence also educates us in the proper choice and timing of the continuum.
Not an easy thing to do...