thousands of years of existence... and yet, humans haven't found a way to co-exist peacefully! racial discrimination... religious belligerance... nationalism... sexism... commercial exploitation...
endless differences and discrimination...
every attempts to moralise this world has failed... the world saw great religions , art n philosophy... but the world still burns!
can there ever be peace on this planet? will humans really ever live in a civilized manner? or like lancelot , king arthur's friend once said... the world will always be a battlefield!
humans have evolved scientifically... but are humans incapable of evolving ethically n morally? if so, how would you think it could be possible... since every religion, philosophy and art has failed to humanise this society?
2007-02-20 01:10:35 · 20 answers · asked by x 2 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
Only because people have corrupted the message religion had as its core belief.
Until we see every one and everything as a valuable part of what we are nothing can ever change.
This change will happen one soul at a time.
Become this change that you wish for in the world. Without you it can never happen.
Love and blessings Don
2007-02-20 01:45:59 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Whoever said that "Man has evolved from apes" was clearly wrong, because we haven't improved, just improvised through time. If you think about it, then we truly aren't any better than what civilization was around 1,000 years ago; we have just adapted to today's society.
It is always easier to blame someone else for not doing anything, and i can say it was all the politics that made the world into a battlefield. Maybe, or maybe not. Look around, there's conflict everywhere and in saying so, it even exists within one's self. What really is the cause of all this distress? The answer is simple; the difference in belief. I am not talking just about religion, and i won't even go there because it's a touche subject. I could elaborate more on this 'theory' but i don't want to waste anyone's time. In short, conflict will remain, because everyone has the ability to think differently and many seem too stubborn to admit their faults. And of course, it is in human nature.
I've always believed that, the more we try to understand answers the more we find ourselves to know the less. Sometimes it is just best not to brood over things we cannot comprehend.
But to answer your question; No i don't think we would ever come to peace, it is all just an effort of hope that prevents this world from turning into hell. Of course this is my belief, you may disagree.
2007-02-20 03:13:18 · answer #2 · answered by Robin 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is really a mind blowing question that Millions of people are trying to answer in thousands of years .Still not failed but fighting to get the answer,among them is you and I.Though I will try to answer to some to the level of my fighting to get the lasting answer for peace I hope both we gonna keep find that precious thing.
You argued about civilization;As far as I know its the best sense merely means the full authority of the human SPIRIT over the externals.In other words civilization should not be a condition, voyage neither a harbour but should be a movement.And the only measure of civilization is the influence of good men and women.Mind that the true test of civilization is not census,nor the size of cities,nor the crops,but the KIND of man that the country TURNS OUT.So in all this there should be the main determining element in the formation of civilization or CULTURE,that's RELIGION. With all this you will come to pass through the point but not the end that PEACE must be in men's HEART before it can be made in civil institutions or the events of history and this must be in much patience.Peace is rarely denied to the PEACEFUL.
2007-02-20 02:01:47 · answer #3 · answered by Tumap 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
To live in unity and peace... A Utopia as it were; I believe there will still be (and should be) discord and fighting. In all things there are at least two sides, and there's a very good reason for that. If we all held the same thought, the same belief, the same outlook or same emotion then we might as well stop existing as human beings. To know the good you have to experience the bad. The reason I am the good person I believe I am is because of all the strife and trouble I've experienced. The greatest people on Earth that I've seen are the people that have been through the worst hardships and not only survived, but thrived in spite of them. I think that applies to all people, individually, and as a whole. IMHO. ;p
2016-05-23 22:24:58 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The answer is,according to the actual means that human use for communication or thinking process is no.
Humans use words as a way to communicate with each other,they name 'peace' and 'war',black and white etc.their language process is based on paradoxes,it is a fact of words.
If we really believed that happiness,peace is a state that has to be maintained permanent then we will never name war and sadness.By giving existence of the other paradox,we give birth,by our own self to the disater.
I believe that human are no smart enough to figure that out,so I think they still need to fight with each other till they figured that out.
You have to know that society is the direct conductor to the fact that they are wars.A society defines itself as a single ego centric organistation that is trying to be self sufficient , and powerful,yet the 2 cant co exist togther.
2007-02-20 02:00:42 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well I would say that humans are egoistic on a moral level, I'm referring to Anne Rands moral theory of egoism. That is to say that everyone is acting in their best interest. If anyone does anything it is because it is helping them somehow, think of even the most generous kind and selfless person and you could still argue that they are acting out of a sense of self fulfilling nobility, or that they receive a feeling of pride -think of the saying it's better to give then to receive.
Take that concept and combine it with Hobbes' state of nature, and social contract. Hobbes says that before laws existed it was every man for himself there was no co-operation or communication. The world was in utter chaos because the strongest man could horde all the resources, and the weakest man could just as easily murder the strongest man in his sleep. I would argue that people would never degrade to this sort of state of nature, but closer to Anne Rands every man for himself explanation.
Of course the social contract is there to keep people in line and force each other to respect each other and to protect each other.
If you accept that people are self-interested and honestly don't give a rats behind about anyone else and therefore society need laws in place to keep them from attacking or simply disrespecting others, the answer is clear, one would have to make people believe that it is in their own best interest to live in peace i.e. respect others.
This may seem like an insurmountable task, to teach everyone to respect others, but progress is being made. The educational system is encouraging tolerance in wealthier societies.
However the difficulty is spreading this sort of mentality to places that have no access to mass media. Places where everyone doesn't own a t.v. set, read the news, or even have a basic foundational educational facilities.
2007-02-20 01:28:31 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, :-( .I think that war will always be here,because you can't attain peace in you're nation without war.At the end of the day most people don't think about what's going on in other countries with small kids deep in poverty,and things like that.They think what can I do to get promoted or how can I make myself a better person,and the whole time they forget about their fellow humans around them.
2007-02-20 01:20:28 · answer #7 · answered by freak33881819 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Based on your last paragraph, you agree with the theory of evolution. Evolutionary ideas are based on "survival of the fittest" not "survival of the nicest." Evolution leads to communism, fascist dicatorships, and nazi regimes. It does not lead to utopia, to loving your neighbor as yourself, or to any code of ethics. What ethics are found in the human race are not here by evolution, since that theory has no conception of good and evil, right and wrong. Right and wrong, or ethics, exists among humankind, so evolution is not so complete a theory as you make it sound. The answer to your question must be sought elsewhere.
2007-02-20 05:05:58 · answer #8 · answered by Emmy 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
We need a superpredator to unite the peoples of this planet. Any species left without predators, with enough food, will just reproduce, get fat, lazy, and reproduce again. Look at rats. When people don't have the threat of being eaten, they get bored, and since we can't give a PS3 to everyone on this planet they are always going to look to other things to while away the time.
2007-02-20 01:35:02 · answer #9 · answered by Mike 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Do you know what violence is something in all of us As love.And sometimes we want to attact,to a person,sometimes to ourselves.My thoughts can be cruel but i think it is like an experiment of rats in an area after a optimum ratio of growth and population.The area is not enough for any of them ,the food also is not enough,but they each want to be very strong or stronger than they are.So they should use more food and more area so they begin to do quarrel, so the optimum population is balanced.We as human beings trying to increase that optimum level with technology but we should do something more important we should controle the birth rate with some rules.unless we dont obstacle the increase of population on earth, disasters will be waiting for us like the laboratory rats in a piece of area.
2007-02-20 01:22:37 · answer #10 · answered by curious 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋