54242Re: [Authentic_SCA] A question about peace
- Sep 7 11:30 AMAt 11:14 AM -0700 07/09/06, lilinah@... wrote:
>At 1:55 PM -0400 07/09/06, NINacide@... wrote:Sorry. My mind is on some other things at the moment. What i meant
>>I'm working on a theory that peace does not exist. As a concept in the
>>dictionary, yes it does, but in practice it doesn't. Like baboon or chimp
>>communities, only conflict arises.
> >Mikhail (the peace agnostic)
>There are periods of general peace in some times and places. There
>just isn't universal and permanent peace for those living on planet
>Perhaps you need to define what you mean by peace.
here, but expressed perhaps a bit abruptly is that for a
philosophical or even historical discussion of "peace", the term
needs to be defined by the person who is instigating the "argument"
(and i mean this in a philosophical sense).
So what i did not say explicitly, but meant, is that since Mikhail is
interested in discussing this issue, and since he is the one
broaching the point, then for the sake of discussion it is necessary
for him to define the word "peace" as he means it.
It would be difficult for other people to address his issue without
knowing what he means when he says "peace".
We may say that we agree or disagree with him, but we may be using
different definitions, and ultimately our points of agreement or
disagreement may be different. In this sort of discussion, we cannot
assume we all agree on what we mean by "peace".
And if Mikhail wishes to use a dictionary definition, then he needs
to specify which dictionary, as all dictionary definitions are not
Urtatim (that's err-tah-TEEM)
the persona formerly known as Anahita
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>