 |
| Welcome
Sign Up Log On |
|
|
Messages: (29) 1
How do you define the word 'peace'?
This is a serious question, and I'd like to hear your answer.
I'm not interested in a dictionary's definition. I want to know what the word means to you. In your experience, or at least in your imagination, what is "peace"?
"Peace" is something that the whole world seems to be striving for, at an individual level and at a national and international level. Yet, I believe that most people have not decided what the word even means.
To answer the question, just reply to this message by clicking here, type your response, and click on "Submit Changes". (Note: this will only work if you're a Member of this site.)
More on this subject later, after we've discussed it a little.
[Top]
For my family members, peace is that they are not under "undue" hardship.
For my local community, peace means safety from harm.
For my nation, peace means maintaining a strong defense with an even stronger offensive capability to subdue any adversary that threatens us directly. It also means staying out of the internal business of other countries with regards to "police force of the world" concepts.
Don
[Top]
Don said:
>For my nation, peace means maintaining a strong defense with
>an even stronger offensive capability to subdue any adversary
>that threatens us directly. It also means staying out of the internal
>business of other countries with regards to "police force of the
>world" concepts.
Is that really what peace means to you, for your nation? Are you sure you thought about it? Peace just means being the toughest country around, so everybody else is scared to mess with you? Isn't that more like a cold war?
Go a little deeper, and think about the question again. We're speaking abstractly here. Consider the term "peace on earth" if you want to. What does that mean? Does it really mean that everybody has such big bombs and destructive capabilities that we're all afraid to "start a conflict" for fear of vaporizing all life on the planet? Do you really think that "peace" is just being lucky enough to live in the country that currently has the biggest arsenal of those bombs?
Think about it some more, please. I await your response.
I'm still hoping that others will speak up, also. I know there are a bunch of people that read this site, at least occasionally, and that a number of you make a habit of "unconventional thought". Hello?
Seth
[Top]
Huh! Cold War?
I don't know how that got into this. I have no problem with America being able to take care of itself. If other countries have a problem with that; then that's their problem.
I don't believe in Peace on Earth. It's impossible to achieve; always has been, always will be.
I don't believe in starting conflicts or provoking other nations either just because we don't agree with their policies, especially their own internal conflicts. If America would stop getting involved in every problem around the world, the planet would eventually have a higher level of Peace On Earth.
However, if America is directly threatened, then use overwhelming force to subdue them. It's peace on this part of Earth I'm concerned about. What happens in other countries is not my concern if it doesn't directly threaten America. We have enough problems here to concern ourselves with.
Don
[Top]
For individual peace, I would define it in a psuedo-Buddist sense.
Peace == a satisfying mindset one can acheive by freeing oneself of the desires and other trappings of the physical world.
For social peace, well, that's a bit tougher -- how about...
Peace == an environment of trust and mutual respect that allows individuals and groups of individuals to exist w/o feeling threatened, defensive or in danger.
In that definition, peace is obviously a transitive state. World Peace cannot exist, because the state decribed cannot be maintained over time...or at least not perfected. It's still a goal, but not an end.
g.
[Top]
The whole eastern idea that we should free ourselves from the physical world leaves me a bit flat, as does Gnosticism, the same idea's working-out in western thinking. I believe that if we're created as physical beings, there's a reason for it and we should make the most of that. I can experience a delightful peacefulness on a cold winter's day after a great big hot meal sitting in an armchair by the fire with a good book. But my peace isn't borne of an escape of those physical desires, but by their appropriate satisfaction.
It also means staying out of the internal business of other countries with regards to "police force of the world" concepts.
If that's the case, then one needs to add a fourth level to the analysis -- a human/world/global peace. I'm listening to Angela's Ashes at the moment, and the depiction of the grinding poverty in Ireland is enough to make one ill-at-ease, even when one's own need for peace (and that of one's country) are fully satisfied.
Sean
[Top]
I totally disagree that we need to achieve global world peace. We only need to achieve peace on this part of Earth, IMHO. We have enough to do right here just to achieve that goal.
I spend my time and effort promoting America first. As long as we maintain the superior defensive and offensive capability, I sleep well at night. Let other countries work out for themselves how to achieve peace. Maybe they need a huge war to get those results. Personnally, I want no more American blood shed over external matters. No more Walls or Memorials for dumb interventions. I'd rather be able to know that Americans are alive and well and maybe get to meet some of them instead of seeing their names on walls and such.
Don
[Top]
As a political citizen, I agree with you. As a human being, I think our responsibilities extend farther. Our government doesn't need to be involved in policing the world. But we as individuals need to make some effort to alleviate others' suffering, regardless of whether or not they're Americans.
As you say, there's plenty to do here. But the worst off in America are often much better off than the rest of the world.
Sean
[Top]
That I agree with. As an individual, one has the freedom to help anyone as he/she feels fit. BTW, I feel a lot of sympathy for the plight of others. I just don't like America policing the world as a matter of policy.
Well, I'm not sure I can tell the difference between someone lying in the street here and someone lying in the street in another country. But that's besides the point. As an individual one can support any cause they wish. As a government policy, I say America needs to remedy America first. It's not our country's job to look after other countries of the world. We, as a country, are not responsible for conditions there.
Although I am a strong proponent of defensive and offensive military might, I saw a bumper-sticker once that sums it up for me as an America-first person: "I hope to see the day when schools have all the money they need for teachers, books, and classroom facilities and the Navy has to have a cookie sale to buy a new aircraft carrier." My interpretation of that is we have the money for both except the money for the schools goes to other countries as foreign-aid and military police force duties. That's wrong in my book!
Don
[Top]
You don't have peace with things that are out of balance. I believe this to be true in civil unrest, personally, politically...
Thinking peace == good/happiness is failing to realize the unpleasent things are part of life, and there is no good without bad anyway.
that's my 2 cents :)
[Top]
I'm still thinking about my comments on Peace, and your input would still be greatly appreciated! I know what I want to say, but some of the comments made by others have given me some ideas to include, or refute, in the "mini-essay" I'm going to write.
[Top]
I'm still thinking about my comments on Peace, and your input would still be greatly appreciated!
Here's what I think.
Peace is the result of mutual understanding, acceptance and tolerance. You're in peace when your position (in all the senses of the term) isn't called into question. That means you can be in peace (or not) with yourself, with your family, your neighborhood, the rest of the world, etc.
For example if you're excluded from the society where you live (because of your color, your social status, your AIDS, or whatever), you're not in peace, even if your country is not at war. You could then be in peace with yourself, your family (or your gang) and the rest of the world, and be in "non-peace" with your neighborhood (you could even call it a war). Or you could be in peace with everyone but you (if you had a good reason).
But when a lion eats a gazelle, it's not a war. They both are at the right place and they both know it.
I've read in that thread that World Peace cannot exist. Maybe it's true. But if there's a God somewhere who put us on Earth (I'm far from being convinced of that), and if He has a goal He wants us to reach, I bet that's the one. You're "complete" when you're in peace with yourself and everything around you.
Flip
[Top]
That's well put.
I believe there is a God. I don't know what The Plan is so I'm not too disillusioned by a planet whose people's have not yet arrived at peace. I've already stated my view so I won't repeat it now.
For anyone who thinks world peace can be achieved, I would like them to answer a few related questions:
1) How is peace defined in terms and in the perspective of Hamas?
2) How is peace defined in terms and in the perspective of the citizens of Pakistan and India?
3) How is peace defined in terms and in the perspective of the citizens of Northern Ireleand?
I could go on and on, which by the way is the reason I feel the way I do. If the answers are just the same rehash of what good-hearted people of the world have been saying for centuries, then nothing new is being said.
1) My answer to number one is simple, the destruction of Isreal and all its people. BTW, I don't like this answer, but from Hamas' perspective, it would bring them peace.
2) As for question number 2, let each blow the other up and afterwards they'll be room for other people who appreciate the land vacated for the newcomers. For a while there will be peace until the newcomers start the usual human tendencies.
3) Number 3 is a lot like number 2.
I can just imagine the reactions of my comments more of the same good-hearted wishes as I alluded to earlier and probably no substantive alternatives. Recall, I don't believe in world peace so I don't need to supply a plan to achieve it!
Now I'll close with what's really important to me. I'm lucky to live in a country that has so much going for it. It's not perfect and there is a lot to do here for improvements. My focus is on working towards peace here in my country and if that is reached, it would serve as one possible model for others to consider and adopt. They may not choose our model, but that is their situation and none of America's business to impress upon them.
I am not against other people of the world; I've traveled some outside the U.S. and have friends in those places. I'm not against legal immigration either; the Statue of Liberty still rings true for me! I would love to see the billions in foreign aid spent outside the U.S., spent here instead on: 1) Elimination of every slum section in the country by rebuilding homes for the residents 2) Give every citizen medical and nursing care 3) Build fantastic schools, staff them with great teachers 4) Help drug users overcome their habits 5) Fix the deteriorating infra-structures 6) Clean the air and waters 7) etc, etc.
In short, America first!
Don
[Top]
"..anyone who thinks world peace can be achieved, I would like them to answer a few related questions:
1) How is peace defined in terms and in the perspective of Hamas?
2) How is peace defined in terms and in the perspective of the citizens of Pakistan and India?
3) How is peace defined in terms and in the perspective of the citizens of Northern Ireleand?
1) My answer to number one is simple, the destruction of Isreal and all its people. BTW, I don't like this answer, but from Hamas' perspective, it would bring them peace.
2) As for question number 2, let each blow the other up and afterwards they'll be room for other people who appreciate the land vacated for the newcomers. For a while there will be peace until the newcomers start the usual human tendencies.
3) Number 3 is a lot like number 2...."
I think that you misunderstood what language and reality are. From the language perspective, peace is only one thing, just varies of what is needed to be. In reality, peace is not getting things acomplished, peace is not: what hamas want, justice? Palestine independence? Hamas, Pakistan, India, Northern Ireland are not seeking peace, they have political and historical conflicts, they hardly want to solve them. All the answers are wrong. Hamas are terrorists! Terrorists cease to exist if that are no reason to be a terrorist. If Israel is destroyed, probably they (hamas) will think that justice was made, and they will cease to exist or create another conflict with another group or country. If they really wanted peace, they probably have solved these conflicts long years ago. The "No State of War" don't means that two countries are in "peace"!
[Top]
I think peace in most instance is a sort of negative goal -- it is the *absence* of what I will simply call stressful situations. When you're screaming at the guy who just cut you off, that's not peace. When you're dissatisfied at work, etc., etc., that's not peace.
The main problem being that most of us are driven, for biological reasons, to constantly improve our situation which inevitably produced stress. We're in prinicipal difficult creatures to satisfy, and when we're not satisfied we're stressed (and stress is sometimes a very good thing).
I often hear people say that if they got everything they ever wanted they'd be bored. I think they're wrong. I think if anyone ever got everything they wanted they'd still end up stressed because we're driven to always imagine something better. Peace is basically the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow -- it's something we can't help but want and strive for, but something we can never touch.
In fact the only people who really seem to ever achieve peace are those who choose to deny the world and retreat into asceticism (the Westernized version of Buddhism that is popular with ascetic types in the U.S. and Europe is a good example of this).
The same thing largely applies to the idea of peace between individuals -- what we want is an absence of stressful realtions which usually means eliminating interpersonal conflict. It's amazing the extent to which some folks will go to achieve this. I've got an entire row of books chronicling various utopian religious communes that were very common in the 19th century United States where people were going to create these incredibly peaceful societies by eliminating conflict largely by eliminating differences (and regardless of your political persuasion, there is no doubting that the appeal of secular socialism is largely in this Eden-ic promise of lack of conflicting interests between individuals which creates stress in societies). Of course none of these utopian efforts, and there are still quite a few such planned communities in the U.S. and abroad, ever succeeded.
Personally, I think it's better just to admit that peace is a completely unattainable negative abstraction and learn to better understand and live with the inherently conflicted nature of human existence.
[Top]
I agree with everything you said. You stated it clearly and precisely.
Regardless of any of the stances any of us pose, your commentary is at the heart of the matter.
Thanks for writing it.
Don
[Top]
Peace - means never having to say "you'll be sorry!!!"
It seems to me that people/countries that are not at peace threaten others and swagger around with the attitude "you'll be sorry if..."
Duncan
[Top]
What do you think is the antonym for the word "Peace"?
Based on some of the discussion we've had on this subject, it sounds like some people think it's one of:
One word answers, please. What is the "opposite of peace"?
(To those who have wondered, some even out loud: Yes, I am going somewhere with this discussion of Peace.)
[Top]
[Top]
Obscure- Dim;dark. 2. Indistinctly heard of perceived. 3. Out of sight; hidden. 4.Of undistinguished station or reputation. 5. Ambiguous or vague; unclear. to conceal or cover.
Vague- Not clearly expressed or outlined. 2. Lacking definite shape, form, or character; indistinct. 3. Indistinctly perceived, understood, or recalled.
Anxiety is a good cause of obscurity or vagueness. War is not the opposite of peace, war is simply the cause of obscurity, vagueness, or anxiety, which is the fear of the future or the feel a being threatened by something or someone. Therefore obscurity and vagueness is the opposite of peace, and war is a by product of obscurity and vagueness, its the results.
[Top]
Serene- Calm and unruffled. Tranquil. Unclouded - fair.
Cloudy- Obscure or vague.
[Top]
[Top]
Like Gandhi? Like Madre Teresa? Like Jesus? No, they are more than unconditional love, and much much more than compassion. Could you have peace and have unconditional love when millions others are being tortured, murdered, are dying because there are no food, no vacines, somebody to help them? Could you have peace when you are "closing your eyes, your ears and your mind to "the others"? Peace isn't love and what you think love is?
[Top]
On 4/10/04, Wilson Ikeda said:
>Peace to me means unconditional love for each other
Do you mean unconditional love for everyone? So no matter what they do, you just love them?
I think you're cheating, frankly. You've just substituted one amorphous word for another. What do you mean by "love"? Warm, fuzzy feelings?
Seth
[Top]
Peace? It seems like it should be such a simple definition. When I was a child I could have defined it briefly but easily. As an adult living in the world we are today, peace seems to be an elusive quest. You are so correct when you say that it is what we all seek, on various levels. Simplicity, serenity and living amicably side by side. Hate does not have any place in a world of peace. Nor does jealousy, greed, resentment, selfishness or, and to me this seems to be the main thing that keeps us from globally obtaining the peace we talk of, power! I think of the way we live and I am greatly saddened by the lies and deceit our government feeds us. We are treated like children and told things that are false. When we discover the truths we become confused and bitter. We want to strike back regardless of our political preferences. Many of us truly know what peace should be but how do we get there? It starts within each of us. We can't stay numb to the world around us. We need to open our eyes as well as our hearts and let peace find us. I know that if I honestly believe in peace then I must also believe in myself. I cannot control anyone, anything or any place but I can control me. Peace will only evade me if I stop looking.
[Top]
<- Previous Thread:
Photography of the Mind
Next Thread: ->
Farteries: Farting Batteries
Until August 31
My Amazon sales
benefit the PMC
Apr 1 - Aug 31
Ad revenue
benefits the PMC
|
TruerWords
is Seth Dillingham's personal web site. From now on, ending a sentence with a preposition is something up with which I will not put. - WC |
