War and Peace: An Examination through Relativity

$7.95

Add to cart

8 word format

document in English

humanities/philosophy

presentation

published 18/04/2008

review : Completed

level : Advanced

requested 0 times

Author's resume

Selection criteria

Summary

Human beings are not inherently desirous of war and destruction. Antithetically, their basal concern is preservation preservation of land, property, rights, religion, and life. War has no innate locale in the souls of man; it is a device, and many consider it flawed in nature and profoundly negative. Agatha Christie believed “that war settles nothing; to win a war is as disastrous as to lose one” (Christie). Immanuel Kant’s Perpetual Peace highlights the state of war on Earth. Even when war is dormant; it exists. Does it need to? Ideal diplomacy would be characterized by ethical and pragmatic relationships with consideration of the common goal preserving the human race. Traditional logic suggests peaceful climate is necessary to preserve the human race, not the destruction associated with war. Kant argues that “The state of peace among men living side by side is not the natural state (status naturalist); the natural state is one of war” (Kant 2). Humans will transition from the state of war to perpetual peace when ready, when perpetual peace becomes natural, when intellect creates mechanisms to properly harness human nature; until then, that mechanism is war.

Human Nature in a Relative World.
Human behavior and Isaac Newton's Third Law.
Human nature has complicated characteristics.
Society directs less attention outside the proverbial box.
The fusion of malleable human emotions with an ideologically diluted society.
The State of War.
An Intellectual Transition.
The Republic is separate from all institutions of government.
The need to protect life, survival, is the human emotion truly fundamental over others.