posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 03:04 PM
reply to post by Skyfloating
Could you explain your stance a bit further that all action ceases when peace is attained? or did you mean violence? I ask because i am asked by
people that if i am in a radiant state of Love, how do i get anything done? i never personally made such a connection, so i struggle to understand
World peace would simply usher in a new set of problems to learn from. From a more logical overall standpoint.. co-operation between minds to solve
"X" is viewed as significantly more reasonable than killing one another. And there is still technically competition within the co-operation. It is
just focused on "winning" in a much larger sense than as an individual.
Why not try to give it a shot, anyway? Its never been tried, we dont know the full repercussions of such a decision made on a mass scale. But, we
are very familiar with the methods we have practiced up until this point. The end result of continuing such violent actions is likely annihilation.
do we need
world peace? not really. a more encompassing question would be "do we need
to survive as a species?" not really.
This leads some to believe that it would be prudent to "check out" the other end of that spectrum to see if the results are any less life-threatening.
As it has yet to be attempted on a meaningful scale (since it involves individuals realizing the "power of the people"), there are no conclusions to
be made. I think it is wishful thinking that all problems would be solved for eternity from making such a decision though. there would still be
plenty of hurdles to overcome.. It is really just a different way to go about things. The possible progress and growth from such a co-operative
system would likely trump anything we have ever known.
to me, world peace would simply indicate that humans are starting to understand that they can actually learn from one another, even those who are felt
to be "wrong." such an attitude would replace the regressive teenage-like nature of believing ones own perspective is the only "absolute truth" and
that it is a competition to convince others of the same. when, really, even those of us who agree on things have different personal
conceptualizations of those seemingly similar perceptions.
i look at it as more.. we know exactly what carrying on as we have results in. And there is a distinct likelihood that we will be consumed by our
own hubris, as we are more concerned with "winning" against others than actually progressing as a race. We have never tried another way, nor have we
even attempted to try.
So, why not try it?
edit on 1-3-2011 by sinohptik because: (no reason given)