It is not much that humans NEED conflict -- it s that CONFLICT is inevitable with humans.
So the button I will press to create "world peace" is probably a red button in a nuclear briefcase that will destroy all humanity. Because the only way to "world peace" is through death of EVERYBODY.
So now I would not snap my fingers.
P.S. this is like one of those genie stories -- where the wish is granted but in such a perverted way that you would have been better off not asking for it.
2006-08-30 02:43:17
·
answer #1
·
answered by hq3 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
We definitely need conflict, if there wasn't any, we absolutely would go stagnate. Not to say that we need all the conflict that we see.
When we came out of the trees, and started walking on the ground. We had to evolve so we could walk upright. We also had to be more aware of our surroundings. Around this time there was an increase in brain size. This increase in the size of our brains helped with the new challenges on walking upright, and needing to be more aware of predators. The walking upright was to conserve energy, (less skin surface getting directly hit by the sun). These two conflicts created change. And yes you are referring to war and peace conflicts, but it boils down the same. Because of 9-11, the U.S. has spent over 40 billion on technology. These things are here/ are being made, because of a need for them. Once again conflict creates change, further advancing society. When the car was first created, no one realized that the gas used in the combustion engine would wreak so much havoc on the environment, now we are finding less harmful ways to commute. So to answer your question I would not create the peace you speak of, that choice should be made by only one being... We may, or may not reach that peace, but it has to be learnt through experience.
CyberNara
2006-08-30 06:10:09
·
answer #2
·
answered by Joe K 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Why do you think the use of "clicking the fingers" was used to show the constant death of the African peoples?
The human race is an Emo child, trigger happy with razor blades.
2006-08-30 05:35:20
·
answer #3
·
answered by bunnyreaper 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
I would do so: simple.
I don't think conflict has done any good to human race.
Growth has happened in peace.
I think US is only country that grew in war time & conflicts !
Yes some destructive tech. get developed during war time, but humans can be happy without that stuff.
2006-08-30 05:35:51
·
answer #4
·
answered by DKS 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I would certainly snap my fingers.
Humans don't necessarily need conflict with one another in order to develop.
We have conflict with the environment and with our health to stimulate us. We are motivated to find a cure for cancer and AIDS, we are motivated to find a way to deal with overpopulation, we are motivated to deal with global warming (or we should be!)
There are plenty of challenges for the human race, without the challenge of preventing other humans from killing us!
2006-08-30 05:35:38
·
answer #5
·
answered by Victoria 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
No. The greatest advances in human endeavors in the sciences and arts are not because of war. War is a political act by dummies, for dummies, not the real achievers.
2006-08-30 05:32:23
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No. We need to learn from our experiences to evolve mentally. If we remove the conflicts think as one, it would bring us closer to the actual end of the world
2006-08-30 05:35:23
·
answer #7
·
answered by lindt 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Definitely. Then I'd undo all the environmental damage that man has caused the Earth. Then I'd subjugate all the lesser races.
2006-08-30 06:04:22
·
answer #8
·
answered by solipsistic 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
I would do it immediately. If there is world peace then it really mean that we are in a golden era!
2006-08-30 05:59:27
·
answer #9
·
answered by Princess 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
no mate i wont do it because i work for a gun factory and ill be out of work
2006-08-30 05:38:35
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋