Taliesin

Interesting article. For myself though the definition of violence is too broad given it does not distinguish between an emotionally driven application of force and a deliberate application force with an intent to cause specific harm. It also seems to be based on there premise that violence is a fundamentally rational matter, and the even more curious assumption that human beings are fundamentally rational creatures rather than emotional creatures who rationalize.

This does raise the question as to why we would need to distinguish emotionally driven violence and clearly 'rational' violence. The answer to that would be that on an emotional level the psychological elements for violence are

arousal - (heightened physical state)
weapon - (means to cause harm)
target
trigger - (any action that in the attackers own mind justifies the attack)

Recognizing these elements and addressing them - particularly the trigger element - may very well enable treatment to minimize certainly violence within a society, particularly through promotion of a set of values (eg self discipline) that raise the trigger level and thus reduce the more emotionally driven and undisciplined attacks. After all social or cultural values would be what establishes what is acceptable.