Surely a verbal threat of violence is better than just violence?
Like, if I want to kill you, surely it’s better that I tell you, than if I just do it without warning? The expected value of the former is strictly better.
It's not either or, you get both. Violence often follows threats, and if threats are allowed you can force people to do whatever you want and just have to remind them of a few cases where actual violence was done.
Like, if I want to kill you, surely it’s better that I tell you, than if I just do it without warning? The expected value of the former is strictly better.