-- Posted by noraa at 4:17 am on Nov. 10, 2008 Can the human race ever really achieve peace? Explain. -- Posted by leon0213 at 4:23 am on Nov. 10, 2008 Well this is pretty much a question asked over and over again. I'd imagine that as long as we live we could never fully achieve peace due to the fact that we each have our own mind and opinions. However you can go for the whole Sci-fi take on it and predict that in hundreds of years the government will brain wash and control everyone to create peace. I think that the famous quote "So long as there are men there will be wars." From Albert Einstein is pretty much fitting to this argument. -- Posted by JohnTheNormalOne at 8:10 am on Nov. 10, 2008 I doubt it. It would probably require the entire population to go into an altered state of mind, or generally a modification to human nature (artificial probably). I've started thinking about this again since I played Assassins Creed. -- Posted by medjai at 8:59 am on Nov. 10, 2008 Yes, it is possible. It's unlikely though and would require communication tecnology, defeating language and religious barriers, and a strong infrastructure and an end to third world countries as well as government power coming from the people worldwide. -- Posted by ElephantStone at 11:56 am on Nov. 10, 2008 well, define peace? Is this an internal peace in each individual, where we live in a world without suicide? Is this a peace between peoples, where there are no wars and indeed no nations? Is this a peace, where theres so racism, no predjudices? -- Posted by noraa at 8:23 pm on Nov. 11, 2008 Quote: from ElephantStone at 11:56 am on Nov. 10, 2008 well, define peace? Is this an internal peace in each individual, where we live in a world without suicide? Is this a peace between peoples, where there are no wars and indeed no nations? Is this a peace, where theres so racism, no predjudices? All. -- Posted by katjassidekick at 11:01 pm on Nov. 11, 2008 As of right now, there is no way of telling. Would the human race even still exist by that time? -- Posted by ElephantStone at 2:13 am on Nov. 12, 2008 Quote: from NoNoNora383 at 4:23 am on Nov. 12, 2008 Quote: from ElephantStone at 11:56 am on Nov. 10, 2008 well, define peace?    Is this an internal peace in each individual, where we live in a world without suicide?    Is this a peace between peoples, where there are no wars and indeed no nations?    Is this a peace, where theres so racism, no predjudices? All. well in short then, no. -- Posted by noraa at 4:33 am on Nov. 12, 2008 Quote: from katjassidekick at 11:01 pm on Nov. 11, 2008 As of right now, there is no way of telling. Would the human race even still exist by that time? Okay, let me rephrase that. Can the human race ever achieve peace before extinction? My personal belief is no. There will always be something to fight over, and no society has the capability of changing that. Humans, in their nature, fight for the top. -- Posted by Blackadder at 10:51 am on Nov. 14, 2008 A far more interesting question is, if peace is possible, what is the price.   My "theory" is that, if peace was worth its cost, and that was obvoius to everyone,  then it would have happened already. -- Posted by whoami111 at 9:02 pm on Nov. 15, 2008 Yes, it is when there are no humans left in the planet. Edit:Wait I didnt see the extinction part. -- Posted by The Last Magister at 9:51 pm on Nov. 15, 2008 Never, as long as pride exists, so shall violence. I.e. if you have something to prove or something to care for, you will harm to do so. -- Posted by lisma at 12:13 pm on Nov. 17, 2008 it's human nature to hate, to fight, to kill. there is no denying it. there are some who would prefer the world without wars or prejudices. But everyone has their biases. there are people who are anit-war yet rascist. there are those who are not racist yet pro-war. there are those who are unhappy with themselves but still want the greater good for everyone. war has many benefits people's views and beliefs may change overtime but they will never stop prejudice. someone in the world will always be racist and biased and love war because the way they profit. we are human and on some levels, we are evil. we destroy the planet we destroy animal lives and we destroy human lives we think it's okay because we claim to be more intelligent, therefore we think we are a superior race. peace won't happen until everything on earth is considered equal. it is human nature to consider things to be unequal. buddhists believe they are wise but peace is unachievable because humans will never change their ways if we were forced to, it would just be hypocritical sorry for the depressing thought but there will probably never be peace on earth -- Posted by sadnessness at 10:58 am on Nov. 18, 2008 I think there will always be people who don't want peace, because there is so much profit to be made (for example in the arms industry or in exporting food) through war for certain other areas that conflict has become almost necessary to keep some countries afloat. The USA has a massive arms industry, and too many people get profit from selling weapons to African tribes who then terrorise certain villages. I think peace is idealogical, and can never be permenant unless some way is found of making everyone disarm and never produce weapons ever again, and these things are not currently enforcable. -- Posted by Scui at 11:01 pm on Nov. 21, 2008 No. Peace is only relative to conflict. There are too many things to fight over. Conflict is ideological, racial, resource-based, etc., and we can't possibly find a way to equalise these tensions in a way that will satisfy everyone. -- Posted by MotoMojo at 10:25 am on Nov. 26, 2008 Yes, we can and do achieve peace on a regular basis. This is a consequence of their ever being hostility. Hostility<>Peace If you're talking about everlasting peace, the argument is moot, IMO. The very existence of peace is only perceivable with the presence of hostility (or whichever synonym you'd like). If any condition (peace, love, happiness, pain, etc.) stayed constant and didn't fluctuate between itself and its complementary opposite (or somewhere in the gray area), the condition would cease to exist (or at least be perceived). -- Posted by Event Horizon at 11:40 am on Nov. 26, 2008 Quote: from MotoMojo at 1:25 pm on Nov. 26, 2008 Yes, we can and do achieve peace on a regular basis. This is a consequence of their ever being hostility. Hostility<>Peace If you're talking about everlasting peace, the argument is moot, IMO. The very existence of peace is only perceivable with the presence of hostility (or whichever synonym you'd like). If any condition (peace, love, happiness, pain, etc.) stayed constant and didn't fluctuate between itself and its complementary opposite (or somewhere in the gray area), the condition would cease to exist (or at least be perceived). ok, lets examine that claim. Peace - # 1 The absence of war or other hostilities. #2 An agreement or a treaty to end hostilities. #3 Freedom from quarrels and disagreement; harmonious relations: roommates living in peace with each other. #4 Public security and order: everlasting peace - same as above, but for a longer time. Peace would not go away because there's no war, it would just be peaceful I mean, sure, they might not CALL it peace-time, but it would still be world peace. -- Posted by MotoMojo at 5:03 pm on Nov. 26, 2008 We would be conditioned to be oversensitive to hostile stimuli if nothing in our environment occurred that was more hostile than an occasional bar fight. Bar fights (only an example) would become the equivalent of war (emotionally/socially) eventually.