Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

54242Re: [Authentic_SCA] A question about peace

Expand Messages
  • lilinah@earthlink.net
    Sep 7 11:30 AM
      At 11:14 AM -0700 07/09/06, lilinah@... wrote:
      >At 1:55 PM -0400 07/09/06, NINacide@... wrote:
      >>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.

      Sorry. My mind is on some other things at the moment. What i meant
      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
      the same.

      Urtatim (that's err-tah-TEEM)
      the persona formerly known as Anahita
    • Show all 26 messages in this topic