Read what Doc said if you are unable to understand what I speak of.
Although form floating can happen between an otter and a beaver,
it is not form floating without a human acknowledging it as such.
Just something that a human being can acknowledge as such,
but won't be so by default.

I am not saying that we make peace exist because we are alive,
I am saying we make peace exist because we are both humans and
alive. Peace is indeed something that happens between two living
organisms that understand what peace is and are willing to take part
in it, but humans are this far the only beings that understand
the concept peace and can willingly take part in it knowing
what it is and what it is for.

Just like gods of a people disappear when a people dies out,
peace will disappear when humans die out.

thank you for acknoledging my point!

your view is sorta like, we aren't going down! and whats the point of peace if they dont understand it!

thats is fair enough, but peace amoung us is still very delusional to an extent considering our nature?
for a perfect utopia we would only live like an opresed organism with lack of opinions, that is never guna happen for lots of reasons (war, conflict), peace in the now is realistic but will never last forever.

________________

I believe in letting people do as they wish, as do I myself. Sometimes, of course, what I wish to do is kill them and they do not wish to die. This gives life interest.

How did I acknowledge your point?
I still don't think peace will come when humans
die. It disappears like everything that is dependent
on humans to exist with a name.

you admited peace could exist without us!

might not happen but is more likely.

you argued if we were dead there would be no peace, thats the simple explanation.

________________

I believe in letting people do as they wish, as do I myself. Sometimes, of course, what I wish to do is kill them and they do not wish to die. This gives life interest.

I certainly did not.
We die, peace dies.
Just like swimsuit molds
and feminism.

No double-posting.

Observing means that there is a third person present -- us, humans. What you are doing is making an observation. But if you're dead, can you still make observations then, and make claims that the world would be peaceful without humans? No, you can't. Hence, if all humans were dead, there would be no one around to call the world peaceful. ... Get it? It's simple to understand, really.

Let's make this simple.


Yes, the world would be "peaceful", but it would be meaningless, since the universe doesn't give a damn, nor does the Earth and its fauna. By your logic, Saturnus is a peaceful planet and so is Mars. Oh, and let's not forget about Galaxy Idon'tgiveadamn, and Milky Way heregoeslogic.

Because it is devoid of humans, or that is what your definition states.



________________
source: animenewsnetwork

Join SRoMU Scanlations or visit #SRoMU at IRCHighWay.

how can co-existance die? think it through please? we die we die...our point of view and survival doesn't mean absolute just!



do those planets have biological entities? no? then there is no co-exsiastance? then there is no peace? punch line here is your too pridefull to admit that we are not needed for the universe to be just as!


woooops delete one please. sorry.
i read the end of your post too soon, just keeping this convo alive u knw.
thanks.

Last edited by fr33noob at 2:24 pm, Mar 17 2010

________________

I believe in letting people do as they wish, as do I myself. Sometimes, of course, what I wish to do is kill them and they do not wish to die. This gives life interest.

I don't see any point of continuing this 'debate', when you don't seem to consider Mamsmilk and Doctor Love's points about peace being a human concept...
Also I think that you're delving too much into metaphysics... in which nothing can be proven, so you can't really use this as an argument

Mmm, like Dr. Love said, Peace exists because humans do not...
I would think, humans are the ones that brought forth destruction ; thus the wars. Yet, we as humans still strive for what we perceive as... peace.
Basically, everyone has their own views. Among all humans, there will always be conflicting views.

fr33noob, apparently you fail to grasp
that the thing we call peace
is

2 beings

willingly pledging

not to assault each other

and knowing that they do it by choice.

Knowing is the point here. Only us humans know what
knowing is, since we are the least mechanical of all beings
living on this planet.


Now, us humans are
the only species that can make choices
of such calibre, philanthropically or pragmatically
choosing to act by a man-named manner, knowing what they do.

Peace cannot be between two beings that are not self-aware, because
they are not humane and they are unable to think of such concepts
as peace. They might act for their own good, as I've said in my previous
posts, but they certainly do not do it for peace. There is no peace to them.
Just that something that us humans who hypothetically are dead would
call a primitive peace, but the animals themselves won't call it peace. It needs
a human to name it a peace. Just like it needs a human to name 4 rocks
in a row art.

it's about time that i posted my views.

the is nothing that proves that peace is the absence of war; To me peace is the absence of misunderstanding due to the fact that most conflicts start with misunderstandings.by understanding each other we have achieved a form of peace because people will know each other well in enough to make a a clear non-bias decisions. What am trying to say is that peace can be achieved through anything and almost everything, ask anyone what WW1 was about and no one can give you a clear honest answer cause they don't really know, but ask them what ww2 was about and they can give you so many reasons. by understanding Hitlers reasons people could and did make a decision weather to accept or go against him. the allied nations watched each others back isn't that some form of peace?
having the mutual understanding that we would support each other. conflicts brings people with like minded ideals together.

that's not to say that my killing Hitler we achieved peace cause that would be a lie by killing him what we a gained was Hope.

There is No such this as Peace and no one has the right to have peace but everyone has the right to be happy and and to have hope.

To truly have human peace one has to recognize and acknowledge the existence and individuality of an individual. but this doesn't mean you have to accept everything that individual does, one mainly has to tolerate certain things which is a lesser form of acceptance after all acceptance is an individuals decision.

if i was to be cynical then the is no reason to kill everyone, one just has to take away free agency and you will have a never progressing world, in other words a stand still of time and activity which means peace. (though an undesirable form of peace)

Last edited by westsiders2 at 2:40 pm, Mar 17 2010

________________
.
http://westsiders2.deviantart.com/

hm i already understood to some extent what they ment about it being a human concept, but i just wanted them to see a different perspective to be honest, your perspective is not the only one you know, i think this broadens the way in wich you think and can debate.

and whats wrong with making bold statements, they can be contreversal but isn't that more interesting? take a step back and be open your eyes to see things even if they are hard or at first or seem arrogant.

and oh yea? again with they don't understand, and since they can't cause conflict with melice such as us?
but never the less it would exists! my whole argument was never to preech that they would comprehand it but to justify that its possible and is more likely to exist without us...just not understanding is not enough, remember the gaia theory we need harmony, then we need to adapt corectly like i have said we don't. and we are the cause for not co-existing with the rest of the EARTH.

Last edited by fr33noob at 2:41 pm, Mar 17 2010

________________

I believe in letting people do as they wish, as do I myself. Sometimes, of course, what I wish to do is kill them and they do not wish to die. This gives life interest.

There is not point in viewing a theory that for first
is not rational, and second, is not sufficent to
back up its validity.

its rational and the theory acounts for your bodies mechanism. you body has thousands of bactierias that co-exist in you making a harmony in wich you can happily live, however a virus will not adapt to your body, it will kill and change the surondings.
we kill, we change our enviroment (skyscrapers, factories etc), we pollute and we are genraly killing this planet like a viral infection.



________________

I believe in letting people do as they wish, as do I myself. Sometimes, of course, what I wish to do is kill them and they do not wish to die. This gives life interest.

Coexistance is not peace.
It is coexistance.
And peace is a human concept
that describes a peaceful coexistance between two
parties willingly not hurting each other.
Willingly.
Human concepts die with humans.
Coexistance exists as long as there are things
that exist together, but it cannot be ever called
peace without a mind that wilfully takes part in it.
The bacteria can only be in peace when they develop
a brain that allows them to think and they get their
hands on human concepts and inherit our ideas,
allowing them to know what peace is and can
participate in it while being able to acknowledge
the participation.

And even if all this were to happen,
the bacteria do not live in peace. They work so that
they can survive, they work so that they can
be efficient in what they do, just like us humans and the rest
of the animals.