1. Find your way through the deepest dungeon in the 18th Mini Mapping Contest Poll.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. A brave new world lies beyond the seven seas. Join the 34th Modeling Contest today!
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Check out the Staff job openings thread.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Hive 3 Remoosed BETA - NOW LIVE. Go check it out at BETA Hive Workshop! Post your feedback in this new forum BETA Feedback.
Dismiss Notice
60,000 passwords have been reset on July 8, 2019. If you cannot login, read this.

Can there be peace without war?

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Malufa, Apr 19, 2007.

  1. Teh_Ephy

    Teh_Ephy

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2006
    Messages:
    3,042
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    not true. we feel that our pack's (brood's, colony's, school's, pod's, etc.) survival is more important then the pack next to us. the real problem is who is considered a part of what pack, and by which people. for example, i hardly consider my brother part of my pack, but i'm sure my parents do.

    Edit: Move this to Medihv's Tower?
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2007
  2. Kivenmage

    Kivenmage

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    11
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    Pfff, that will never happen while Bush is still around.
     
  3. Teh_Ephy

    Teh_Ephy

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2006
    Messages:
    3,042
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    WHAT will never happen?
     
  4. MySpaceBarBroke

    MySpaceBarBroke

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2007
    Messages:
    3,554
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    come to think of it... i'm scared. now all the intelligent debates will go to medivh's tower, which i doubt i will ever get to with my current rep and post count.
     
  5. Teh_Ephy

    Teh_Ephy

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2006
    Messages:
    3,042
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    you don't need to be a member to post, just to start new threads. anways, i still want to know what will happen while Bush is around.

    hmm, another reason war will never really be gone is that people like Kivenmage are ambiguous enough to leave LOTS of room for interpretation. that leaves lots of room for being offended.
     
  6. Hakeem

    Hakeem

    Joined:
    May 30, 2007
    Messages:
    2,503
    Resources:
    2
    Maps:
    2
    Resources:
    2
    Ha ha! (Well, I'm not really a "ha ha" person, but I found that very funny.)

    As for no joy without sadness, those are just things that we feel, we can feel however we want.
    Light does not create darkness, darkness is the default. It can be defined without light.
    As for good and evil balancing each other, good has the upper hand.
    Hydrogen and helium rise without falling because they do not have enough mass to be pulled down by earths gravity.

    Humans have wars because they can't all agree. They have evolved beyond instincts and can make their own decisions. They still want to survive and find mates (well, mostly), but not because of instincts. That used to be the reason. War is not our means of evolution, we have destroyed any hope of mass evolution with hospitals. Their will always be criminals and terrorists and people who would kill, but that's not war. There are a lot governments that still will start wars, and as long as there are those government there will be war.

    As long as a small group of people can control an army there will be war.
    If everyone voted about everything there would be no war.
    The internet is helping to inform everyone of everything so that that will happen.

    But, it may take a big war to push everyone to peace.

    :exhales deeply:
    Didn't expect my first post to be that long.
     
  7. Teh_Ephy

    Teh_Ephy

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2006
    Messages:
    3,042
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    agreed

    darkness is the default, but you can't define it without light.

    NO. helium and hydrogen rise without falling because oxygen/nitrogen is being pulled under them. they are being pulled down, they're just floating on top of the rest of the gases in the atmosphere. like a cork floating on water.

    Humans have wars because they can't all agree. They have evolved beyond instincts and can make their own decisions.

    if it ISN'T the reason, then why? habit?

    agreed, if there's something wrong with something, it's not meant to do as well as the similar things that perform better. that does not happen with humanity any more.

    as long as there are terrorists, some government will be declaring a war against them. therefore, presence of terrorists = war.

    there will always be these governments

    okay, but this would be highly impractical.

    the internet is full of false information along with the truth.

    it would take a big war to push the general population to peace. you know the cliché you don't know what you have till it's gone? that's what war does for peace.

    nothing wrong with talking too much, i do it all the time. believe me, this post was not "long"
     
  8. The Last Istari

    The Last Istari

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    1,006
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    No, unfortunatley, there will always be war, wether it be physical, political, or emotional, there will always be conflict and strife.

    The only way that worldly peace will exist is if everyone is of the same body, mind and soul, thinking the exact same thoughts, doing the exact same things, and agreeing on the exact same topics.
     
  9. Hakeem

    Hakeem

    Joined:
    May 30, 2007
    Messages:
    2,503
    Resources:
    2
    Maps:
    2
    Resources:
    2
    Well, they still don't fall.

    People want to survive because they fear death or they want to do something before they die. People want to find mates because it is an emotional need. Other animals just want to pass on their genes.

    If all the governments cooperated then war would not be declared against a government because it has terrorists, terrorists come from everywhere.

    If enough governments decided that it was time for the world to have a single government then the other governments would either surrender or go to war (which I don't think enough would win for war to continue happening).

    Well, the voting system would have to be fixed.

    The internet is helping spread all information (a few conspiracy theories here and there makes some people take action (usually for the better)).

    After a big war (assuming that radiation levels are low enough to support human life) people would push for peace more than ever.

    Respectively.

    People can disagree without war, but sometimes they disagree too much.
     
  10. Teh_Ephy

    Teh_Ephy

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2006
    Messages:
    3,042
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    finding mates means finding someone to pass your genes on to. that is an instinct, not an emotional need. finding partners would be the emotional need.

    wars don't need to be between governments. have you ever heard of a civil war? that's a government (sometimes not even) having war with itself.

    if somebody goes to war over something, there's going to be a war until total A) total extermination or B) one side has given up. chances of any nation surrendering a war for sovereignty are ZERO. it's how America happened, it's how North Korea happened, it's how Vietnam happened. if you're fighting for freedom to control your damn homeland, you're going to keep fighting until you're either dead or missing enough limbs to fight.

    it would take an obscene amount of time, money, and resources to amend the fact that not every single idiot in the world is allowed to voice his opinion. not to mention that the general public is usually wrong. do you know what prohibition is? do you know what that "good" idea did to the US? do you know that prohibition is now gone, and admittedly a bad idea?

    yes, because conspiracies usually spawn terrorism and idiocy, terrorism and idiocy are always always always for the better. [/sarcasmOff] do you have any idea WHAT the internet consists of? honestly, do you? you seem to live a woefully sheltered life to believe that the internet is full of truth, which, by the way, it sure as hell isn't. the internet is as truthful as the author of the content you are currently reading. do you live in some really rich all-white neighbourhood where you have people gather research on your papers for you? the VERY FIRST THING your school librarian will teach you in regard to research is to NOT BELIEVE ANYTHING ON THE INTERNET.

    after a big war, people will hold on to their old hatreds. because it's a big. war. a few people will push for peace through understanding, the VAST majority will push for peace through isolation. once bitten, twice shy. i'm talking about people perceived to be behind wars, not the wars themselves.

    example: WWII. After Germany lost WWI, did Europe brush everything under the carpet and try to start new? hell. no. they wanted their damn compensation, and you can bet your ass they took as much as they could. that, in turn, caused a vicious economic depression in Germany, which in fact is what allowed Hitler to start the second world war. he took advantage of the desperate German peoples, their desire for a better economy and vengeance on the rest of Europe.


    by the way, what I meant by "big war" is humanity coming close to extinction.
    people can, countries... not nearly as much as you'd hope. countries can disagree without direct conflict, but there will be conflict, and there will be lots of it.


    by the way... the act of defining something is to distinguish it from the things around it. if there is nothing different, you can quantify it but not define it.
    if there is nothing else to compare it to, then it has no boundaries, and cannot be defined. you cannot define something without simultaneously defining something else as being different from it.
     
  11. Captain Griffen

    Captain Griffen

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,001
    Resources:
    3
    Maps:
    3
    Resources:
    3
    Peace is the absense of conflict.

    That's stagnation, and humanity will never accept it or be capable of it, war or no.
     
  12. Hakeem

    Hakeem

    Joined:
    May 30, 2007
    Messages:
    2,503
    Resources:
    2
    Maps:
    2
    Resources:
    2
    Teh_Ephy:
    Well, people are actually looking for partners (for the most part).

    From time to time there may be a civil war, but when (I really do think this will happen) it becomes widely accepted that everyone is equal, we can all start agreeing a little more.

    If I know I can't win I would prefer to live for today and fight fo tomorrow. Either way I think that every country will eventually settle on some kind of similar government.

    Yes, the voting system would take a lot of time to fix (peace would/will take a lot of time), but it can be fixed.
    And you would have to take a test before you vote so that you can prove you know what you're doing and will make an informed decision.

    And I don't trust the internet, but it is letting everyone communicate with everyone else.

    A really big war might kill everyone. That kind of war would not bring peace. But it may take a fairly large war to bring peace. (fairly large < really big.)

    If every country had some kind of similar government then we could all disagree, and our governments too, about things without war.

    P.S.
    How does defining fit in to all this?

    Captain Griffen:
    I don't care what the dictionary defines peace as,
    A few murderers running around is not war.
    Conflict is good.
    Without conflict we wouldn't need to do something better, we would just do enough. Enough is not enough. We need to do things better than other people, but we don't need war for that. Businesses try to do things better for their customers so that they will get more money than the competition. People want their sports team to win, people want their government to have better technology than everyone else.
    That doesn't have to mean war.
    Without conflict, we wouldn't have anything to brag about.
     
  13. Teh_Ephy

    Teh_Ephy

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2006
    Messages:
    3,042
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    Okay, but looking for "mates" is very instinctual.

    Equality has nothing to do with views on any subject volatile enough to create wars. Equality has to do with basic treatment, and may result in wars, but is far from the singular cause of every last war in history.

    So... you'd let foreigners take control of your life and tell you what you should think about things? Just so that you could hold on to the pathetic life that wouldn't even die for a belief, an inborn right? I'd rather die for a cause as noble as my people's freedom then live on without it.

    That would
    A) Make voting more trouble than its worth if you aren't willing to die for a worthy cause (not to mention lazy people), which leads to
    B) Drastically lower voter turn-out
    C) Be ass-loads of trouble, because you'd need a new test for every new topic/subject to be voted on, otherwise you're weeding out a LOT of people who know about some things but not others
    D) Be completely ineffective. Would you like to know how? Just because you know about what you're voting about doesn't mean you have a right to, just because you don't grasp what you're voting about to the entirety that something as picky as a LEGAL SYSTEM wants doesn't mean you don't have the right to.
    E) For the reasons mentioned in D, hit more people than the ones involved in what's being voted on, and not hit all of the involved people.

    Then stop talking about the internet like it's some magic fountain of truth.

    Well... I'd have to say WWI was a fairly large war, and it actually set the stage for WWII. So yes, something as drastic as near-extinction would be necessary to reunite terrorists that don't distinguish between innocent and guilty, and regimes that only care about money.

    Well too freaking bad that that's never going to happen. Socialism vs Capitalism. Considering the fact that both have worked fairly well in the history of the world, and that Capitalist countries tend to be run by the rich that enjoy staying that way, similar governments are going to be hard.

    you said in your first post that you can define darkness without light. I didn't address that in my reply to that, but still wanted to get that out.

    He never said that was the dictionary's definition of peace...


    Yes and no. If the conflict is open, acknowledged as conflict, and most importantly, over a reconcilable subject matter, then yes. If it's the kind of conflict that comes from old hatreds, discrimination, bigotry, then no.

    A)Competition != conflict. Competition DEFINITELY != conflict. Conflict is an inability to coexist (existence of opposition). Competition is a refusal to exist on par with others (existence of rivals).
    B)you know all across America, standards are actually being LOWERED? Like some pansy-ass schools have banned tag for some reason like only one kid can win, and that might hurt the other kids' feelings. Lots of schools hand out "completion ribbons" on Field Day, as opposed to traditional 1st 2nd 3rd so that nobody's feelings get hurt for not winning ribbons, because everybody is special.
     
  14. Hakeem

    Hakeem

    Joined:
    May 30, 2007
    Messages:
    2,503
    Resources:
    2
    Maps:
    2
    Resources:
    2
    I forgot that slavery was not the cause of the American civil war. My mistake.

    I would die for my beliefs. I would prefer to use my pathetic life to regain freedom instead of die when it was hopeless and leave my country without freedom forever.

    Not a full test just a few questions about some specific matters. Also I would rather have better choices than in the last 2 presidential elections. (Sorry, I will try to talk as a citizen of the world in the future.)
    I'm just suggesting a way to partially fix the voting system.

    I didn't intend to say that the internet is a fountain of truth. I'm sorry if I made a anyone believe so.

    I'm just saying that some kind of war may be necessary for peace.

    I don't want to argue about the kind(s) of governments a peaceful world would have, I think we can have a world with governments that can get along eventually.

    I think it can, but I'm not sure.
    I don't want to try to define it. My main point was that light does not create darkness.

    I know.
    I read this whole thread before I dared to even think about posting (I read the post about the definition).
    If we keep arguing about the definition of peace, we will never even get close to an answer to the question.

    Definitely.

    War is competition then.
    And I'd rather this does not turn into a "What's wrong with America" thread. (Because that would be very long.)

    I'm not sure that peace can stay.
    If you were born into a world without war would you take it for granted?
    The average person probably would.
     
  15. Teh_Ephy

    Teh_Ephy

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2006
    Messages:
    3,042
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    Good on you for admitting it. The American civil war wasn't about slavery, it was about state's rights VS federal rights. Slavery just happened to be the right that was being fought over.

    Then forgive me for not stating my first thing as strongly as I intended. I meant that if it was the only option, and in many cases it would be, you'd be fighting until you were dead/dying or missing enough limbs to do so.

    Then they'd have to be some damn good questions.*

    The literacy test was a good idea, but they took that away.

    You're not making anyone believe, you're just talking like it is.

    And I'm debating the size of that war, not that it will not be necessary.

    That get along, yes. That are similar, no.

    Agreed, but it's fairly common to see clever sayings like "The brighter the light, the darker the shadow it casts." A nice one from KH2: "The closer you get to light, the taller your shadow becomes." It's not so much that light creates darkness (like in the second quote) as much as light is the only thing you can use to identify darkness (as can be interpreted from the first).*

    If we can't define peace, then we can't answer the question "Can peace happen without war" anyways. Edit: Maybe a little clearer, if you can't define something then you can't answer a question about it.*

    No, war is conflict, not competition. Tournaments are competition.

    I'm just citing examples of humanity going the opposite way you're talking of. They just happen to be in America, sorry if I bring those up a lot.

    Which is why it would be so easy for somebody that wasn't average to go and change it.

    Note: I was rushed when I originally wrote this, anything followed by a * was added after the original post.
     
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2007
  16. Hakeem

    Hakeem

    Joined:
    May 30, 2007
    Messages:
    2,503
    Resources:
    2
    Maps:
    2
    Resources:
    2
    Well then lets define peace before we go on.
    I define peace as the absence of people trying to kill massive amounts of other people.
    Is that a good definition for this question?
     
  17. Teh_Ephy

    Teh_Ephy

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2006
    Messages:
    3,042
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    Not really, because in complete anarchy (rather far from peace) there are no people trying to kill massive amounts of other people, but there are still large amounts of people being killed.

    Let's define peace as a state of existence in which a large majority of the involved parties are in agreement, and are not trying to affect other parties in a negative manner.
     
  18. Hakeem

    Hakeem

    Joined:
    May 30, 2007
    Messages:
    2,503
    Resources:
    2
    Maps:
    2
    Resources:
    2
    That's a good definition.

    -- Back to the debate --

    Well, a few questions is better than none. (One head is better than zero.)

    It may not even have to be a big war, it could be a war that disgusted everyone. Maybe a war against all those who would start a war for anything other than peace.

    Actually the brighter the light, the less of the dark. Light doesn't just travel in a line, it curves around objects like all waves, not to mention ambient light (except that I just mentioned it). And as you shadow gets bigger, your clothes become brighter.

    We have the ability to coexist (as most of us are not actually at war), but sometimes we refuse.

    In a state of peace we would have to teach our children about how bad war is, even if it means showing them things that cause them to lose their lunch, if we want to keep peace.

    P.S.
    Is it just me or whenever someone says 'agreed' do you imagine the dreadlord saying it?
     
  19. Teh_Ephy

    Teh_Ephy

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2006
    Messages:
    3,042
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    Thank you.

    And a literacy test is just as good, but they took that away :thumbs_down:.

    That war would have to disgust people in a very specific manner. The Vietnamese war disgusted lots of people; it disgusted them right into organizing large riots and oft-violent demonstrations.

    Actually, waves travel straight. Umbra/penumbra and lunar eclipse diagrams:
    [​IMG][​IMG]
    They oscillate, but they travel straight. Sine wave diagrams:
    [​IMG][​IMG]
    Light does not deviate from its perfectly straight path except by means of gravity, refraction, and reflection edit: and also diffraction, see below. Thanks to Captain Griffen and Dalaran_Guard for fixing that up.
    Ambient lighting is the lighting used in pictures to set a certain mood about, as opposed to the traditional meaning of "ambient", as in naturally there (light is never "naturally there"; it comes from light sources, typically anything undergoing: combustion (fire), significant friction with something else (flint to light a wood fire), nuclear fission/fusion (stars), chemical reactions (glow sticks), electric charge balancing (lightning), and demolition-by-super-hero). Anyways, brighter light makes darker darkness because of contrast (the same way that they define each other). Try it: if you're in a dimly lit area, there won't be much difference between the shadows and the light. If you're standing in front of a flood light, there's going to be a massive difference.

    We always do, but for many reasons we either refuse or behave as if we didn't.

    If you can get past pansies that worry about hurting their feelings :bored:, and the rest of the world that

    It's just you :p.
     
    Last edited: Jun 2, 2007
  20. Captain Griffen

    Captain Griffen

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,001
    Resources:
    3
    Maps:
    3
    Resources:
    3
    If you think peace is the absence of war, go to Baghdad. There is no war there.

    Enjoy your 'peace'.

    As for light propogation, it's quantum. Therefore stop trying to get your head around it like it is deterministic. Photons travel in curves and all sorts of weird and wonderful ways. Those paths just cancel out.

    Best model is waves, with each point on each wave propogating out waves from there.