Is peace attainable?

Lord Starch · May 23, 2015, 01:15:15 PM

Throughout human history we've always delved in war. It's no secret and we're pretty used to it, and some good tech has come from it (not saying it negates the deaths). But is there a point where humans reach such a stable lifestyle that we won't need to engage in war anymore? Or is it simply a product of our evolution?

Turkey · May 23, 2015, 01:24:17 PM

Absolutely, and we're seeing a dramatic decrease in deaths per capita due to war and murder.

Mr. Psychologist · May 23, 2015, 01:26:56 PM

Peace from war is attainable, we are close to that anyway. It's been quite a while since any total war has been declared on another country and most of the current conflicts are peacekeeping/influence spreading from the largest nations and civil wars from the 3rd world ones.

When the living standards of the 3rd world reach parity with the 1st, people are no longer fighting for resources to survive and the like it might be doable.

Extremism, terrorism, separatists, secessionists and the like will be the only major barrier to proper peace, because there will always be nutjobs who think that blowing themselves sky high and taking a few children/fruit stalls/boots with them will make the world a better place, but with a bit of luck some darwinism will come into play and those predisposed to a volatile end will stop breeding on account of having blown their giblets into atoms.

Verbatim · May 23, 2015, 01:28:59 PM

Maybe if everyone stopped reproducing...

More Than Mortal · May 23, 2015, 01:36:31 PM

Total peace will be attainable when we transcend human nature as a result of technology.

Or an AI kills us all. . .

Lord Starch · May 23, 2015, 01:42:48 PM

Quote from: Mr Psychologist on May 23, 2015, 01:26:56 PM

Peace from war is attainable, we are close to that anyway. It's been quite a while since any total war has been declared on another country and most of the current conflicts are peacekeeping/influence spreading from the largest nations and civil wars from the 3rd world ones.

When the living standards of the 3rd world reach parity with the 1st, people are no longer fighting for resources to survive and the like it might be doable.

Extremism, terrorism, separatists, secessionists and the like will be the only major barrier to proper peace, because there will always be nutjobs who think that blowing themselves sky high and taking a few children/fruit stalls/boots with them will make the world a better place, but with a bit of luck some darwinism will come into play and those predisposed to a volatile end will stop breeding on account of having blown their giblets into atoms.

This makes a lot of sense. I always wonder though if a country will rise and end up terrorizing the world like germany did twice. Who knows, but like you said we are indeed reaching a point where a stable country will choose diplomacy over war and we deal more with terrorism than truly organized threats.

Lord Starch · May 23, 2015, 01:44:10 PM

Quote from: Meta Cognition on May 23, 2015, 01:36:31 PM

Total peace will be attainable when we transcend human nature as a result of technology.

Or an AI kills us all. . .

Hmm, the concept of transhumanism is a good one. I question though if transhumansm will make us better at war or prevent war.

SgtMag1 · May 23, 2015, 02:16:09 PM

Verbatim · May 23, 2015, 02:18:07 PM

Quote from: Lord Starch on May 23, 2015, 01:44:10 PM

Quote from: Meta Cognition on May 23, 2015, 01:36:31 PM
Total peace will be attainable when we transcend human nature as a result of technology.

Or an AI kills us all. . .
Hmm, the concept of transhumanism is a good one. I question though if transhumansm will make us better at war or prevent war.

transcending humanity doesn't necessarily mean transhumanism though

i'd love to transcend humanity, but i don't exactly jive with the whole transhumanism thing

also, you can't be "better" at war--that's just silly

DAS B00T x2 · May 23, 2015, 02:35:25 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on May 23, 2015, 02:18:07 PM

Quote from: Lord Starch on May 23, 2015, 01:44:10 PM
Quote from: Meta Cognition on May 23, 2015, 01:36:31 PM
Total peace will be attainable when we transcend human nature as a result of technology.

Or an AI kills us all. . .
Hmm, the concept of transhumanism is a good one. I question though if transhumansm will make us better at war or prevent war.
transcending humanity doesn't necessarily mean transhumanism though

i'd love to transcend humanity, but i don't exactly jive with the whole transhumanism thing

also, you can't be "better" at war--that's just silly

Sure you can. Just be more proficient in strategy and killing than your adversary.

Verbatim · May 23, 2015, 02:37:25 PM

killing is bad though

if you're better at doing something bad, then that just makes it even worse, doesn't it

DAS B00T x2 · May 23, 2015, 02:41:12 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on May 23, 2015, 02:37:25 PM

killing is bad though

if you're better at doing something bad, then that just makes it even worse, doesn't it

Not necessarily.

Verbatim · May 23, 2015, 02:47:37 PM

i would say pretty much always

DAS B00T x2 · May 23, 2015, 02:51:57 PM

There exist threats which must be removed, people who must be eliminated or detained, and ideologies that must not be allowed to thrive.

SgtMag1 · May 23, 2015, 02:52:22 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on May 23, 2015, 02:47:37 PM

i would say pretty much always

Sometimes people deserve to die, though. Such as Hitler, Stalin, Bin Laden, et al.

Verbatim · May 23, 2015, 02:53:01 PM

Quote from: SgtMag1 on May 23, 2015, 02:52:22 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on May 23, 2015, 02:47:37 PM
i would say pretty much always
Sometimes people deserve to die, though. Such as Hitler, Stalin, Bin Laden, et al.

"pretty much always"

Turkey · May 23, 2015, 02:54:59 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on May 23, 2015, 02:37:25 PM

killing is bad though

if you're better at doing something bad, then that just makes it even worse, doesn't it

I'm gonna use Star Trek for perspective. In one episode, 'A Taste of Armageddon', they encounter a world that has transcended conventional warfare and now does simulated war, in which a global computer system monitored by both factions generates "attacks" and designates random citizens to be painlessly executed. They chose this because they saw it as a more efficient and less cruel form of war, which they thought of as necessary and inherent to the species. Here's a clip of Kirk and friends destroying that system and his subsequent speech:

YouTube

It's not really a counter to your claim, but I think it's interesting to think about when discussing the "efficiency" of war.

Verbatim · May 23, 2015, 02:55:35 PM

Quote from: DAS "كافر" B00T on May 23, 2015, 02:51:57 PM

There exist threats which must be removed, people who must be eliminated or detained, and ideologies that must not be allowed to thrive.

sure

but i still don't think we should be playing around with words like "better" when it comes to discussing war
you used the word "proficient" earlier, and i would probably use that word as well

gats · May 23, 2015, 03:12:52 PM

maybe, not in our lifetimes though

Lord Starch · May 23, 2015, 05:15:53 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on May 23, 2015, 02:18:07 PM

Quote from: Lord Starch on May 23, 2015, 01:44:10 PM
Quote from: Meta Cognition on May 23, 2015, 01:36:31 PM
Total peace will be attainable when we transcend human nature as a result of technology.

Or an AI kills us all. . .
Hmm, the concept of transhumanism is a good one. I question though if transhumansm will make us better at war or prevent war.
transcending humanity doesn't necessarily mean transhumanism though

i'd love to transcend humanity, but i don't exactly jive with the whole transhumanism thing

also, you can't be "better" at war--that's just silly

I meant more effecient. Better weapons, better strategies, better resources, all that stuff. Perhaps transhumanism won't catch on beyond a few medical necessities, I wouldn't really mind either way. But I feel like it seems inevitable (maybe not in a sci fi sense) as technology advances.

Verbatim · May 23, 2015, 05:19:34 PM

Some transhumanists argue that we're already there anyway. We have prosthetic limbs, spectacles, contact lenses, and, of course, the Internet. Nanotechnology is also a huge prospect of the near future.

Not Comms Officer · May 23, 2015, 05:23:41 PM

Oh god, world peace is never gonna happen. People start wars against eachother for the most retarded reasons.

aREALgod · May 23, 2015, 10:46:44 PM

Quote from: Verbatim on May 23, 2015, 01:28:59 PM

Maybe if everyone stopped reproducing...

HURRRR get the fuck outta' here

Dragging your bullshit into every thread

Verbatim · May 23, 2015, 10:48:50 PM

Having kids is wrong.

Korra · May 23, 2015, 11:24:36 PM

There will always be warriors. And there will always be war.

Roam · May 24, 2015, 12:40:10 AM

Only after everything is lost.