Is World Peace possible?

[Space Lizard]

4 hours ago, Wilhelm44 said:

Zero evidence  I'm guessing you believe UFO's are a hoax, we are the pinnacle of creation, and we're all alone in the universe ? 

Whatever UFOs are, there's no proof that they are aliens, let alone from a peaceful and enlightened civilization. It's all just stories at this point.

Quote

If violence and struggle breeds intelligence, Afghanistan should be a desirable place to live in. 

The fallacy is thinking that a peaceful and enlightened civilization will be boring and not creative.

There's a great quote about that from the movie The Third Man where Orson Welles' character says:

Quote

 You know what the fellow said—in Italy, for thirty years under the Borgias, they had warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the Renaissance. In Switzerland, they had brotherly love, they had five hundred years of democracy and peace—and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock.

It's a trade-off; you can have peace and stagnation, or war and progress.

[Wilhelm44]

@Space Lizard

 

[Space Lizard]

On 1/15/2022 at 5:27 AM, Knowledge Hoarder said:

It doesn't matter whether it's possible or not. We don't have a choice. Either the humanity unites, or our species will die out. There's no middle ground here.

Why is there no middle ground? We've never been united and never had universal peace, but there's more humans alive than ever. Your statement is pure binary thinking, with no basis in reality that I can see.

[Thought Art]

No for a long time

[Tanz]

Many people never thought they would see a black us president and we did. World peace is a much larger task but we should never think it's not possible. Change can happen in our lifetime. At the end of the day being at peace with the world and your inner world is what counts the most.

[LordFall]

On 1/14/2022 at 9:09 PM, Yarco said:

Yes.

The easiest way to achieve world peace ironically would be for a one-world authoritarian government to enforce it on all citizens and member nations through threat of violence.

You could argue if it's really world peace if citizens are being jailed or sent to re-education camps or afraid to speak out or fight back. But by your definition of just not having warfare, then it would be successful.

If we had a third world war and one nation ended up controlling the entire world by force, then by definition we would have world peace at least for a time. 

No one ever said world peace was rainbows and doves. World peace could still be an absolute dystopian hell-hole.

Outside of something like I described above, I'd say no, or incredibly unlikely. Any time you have scarce resources there will be fighting.

I think you have the closest idea that will possibly work. I believe that world peace will be achieved by a stage turquoise dictator that achieves a monopoly of armed forces in the world. 

Of course, it is possible, depends on your definition of peace though. You could say that the concept of nations was a huge step towards world peace, remember guys that before each and every city and village was at war with another, now cities within the same country are at "peace" with one another.

"Peace" in quotations because humans still compete within their own countries but at least it's under the understood concept of a single nation. Conflict is natural in life and even purely loving and enlightened beings still want to mess and "attack" each other but such a thing is completely different in unity vs considering each other as different beings. Think like teasing/play fighting/BDSM within a healthy and loving relationship.

I think this will happen within our lifetime, that's my bet. It will require the concept of nations to fade and them to be recognized as mere provinces within the human empire. If you've been watching the news you see that there is global conflict on the rise, perhaps this is good. 

The average human does not need to be at stage green and above to exist within a stage green and above society.

I do believe that a society is only as strong as its strongest link and our most powerful individuals at the moment are corrupt but there is no reason a peaceful entity could not rise to be the most powerful human in the world. 

Edited January 24, 2022 by LordFall

[Danioover9000]

On 19/01/2022 at 9:16 AM, Knowledge Hoarder said:

We are more united than ever before. Throught media (Facebook, Instagram, internet in general etc.), mass culture (Netflix, television etc.), common language (English), countries generally trying to negotiate first rather than immidiatelly wage war (which was not a thing in the past). The fact that we're interacting right now, proves that humanity is in the slow process of unification. Show me one point in history, when we have been more united than today. I'll wait. 

From the primitive tribes of Stone Age, we have come far.

Because certain issues humanity faces/will face require fast and effective collective world wide action, instead of senseless bickering between it's divided parts. For example, global warming. And much more.

How ironic, because it's often actually your thinking that's binary and simplistic af. "uSa BaD, rUsSiA gOoD" "vAcCiNeS bAd"

   And this is what knowledge hoarding does to you, makes you a bit judgemental to others 

   There's not just two ends of the spectrum, but a middle section and degrees going towards either ends. There's not just binary thinking of good vs bad, right vs wrong, humanity should this, humanity shouldn't that, but there's a lot of complexity and nuance to consider. That's why NLP, Spiral dynamics series, Ego development modal, developmental psychology and Carl Jung's archetypes exist, to name a few.

[Terell Kirby]

Not really. Humans are only as peaceful to the extent of threat levels to their survival.

We all have survival agendas that constantly conflict with each other.

[hamedsf]

world peace is possible but again with some conflicts here and there. 

human beings have good sides and bad sides and no one can ever get rid of another part completely.

if you become 100% good, you won't survive.

if you become 100% bad, you won't survive again.

so survival won't allow complete world peace! 

 

Edited January 31, 2022 by hamedsf

[Danioover9000]

@Knowledge Hoarder

On 1/24/2022 at 8:38 AM, Knowledge Hoarder said:

Another prime example of binary thinking, that I haven't even noticed at first lol

I guess it does

Ok, great, complexity. I did say originally that humanity should unite, but that's just my personal opinion. I don't see any other way of dealing with humanity's macro problems. But hey, maybe there are other ways, however it would be helpfull to actually talk about these other solutions, instead of being like "NOPE! ur wrong! World peace not possible" or "Muh complexity". Unification doesn't necessarilly have to be one superstate, there can be something like a confederation of states, each with their own autonomy, but somehow united culturally, economically, and in every other way. Anyway, this guy @Space Lizardreacted to that statement, saying that that's pure binary thinking, not rooted in reality, and argued that at no point was humanity ever united. I then replied, saying that though we've never been united, we are currently more united than ever before, and that throught history we've been slowly moving towards that direction. Then I showed him the examples of his binary thinking. Then you came along, criticizing my binary thinking, although he belongs to one of the most binarary thinkers on this forum. Frankly, I don't see a point in your post.

   Technically, throughout human history, we've been always uniting and separating. It's not just only uniting, but separating also plays a role in developments too. I'm not just critiquing you with muh complexity and nuanced systems thinking, but @Space Lizard and other users with blind spots in their moral, cognitive and stage of development, their limited states and life experiences with interactions with different cultures and lack of travels to different parts of the world. That's all I'm pointing out, and personally it's not a critic, I'm pointing out this needs nuance. 

   Also, learn to handle a joke here and there. Jeez.

Edited January 31, 2022 by Danioover9000

[karltiboleng]

As long as the whole world doesn't transcend survival (i.e. stage turquoise), the world will never know peace. So yeah virtually impossible.