These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Intergalactic Summit

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

A just and lasting peace

Author
Arkady Sadik
Gradient
Electus Matari
#21 - 2011-12-13 21:13:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Arkady Sadik
Lyn Farel wrote:
Astrid Stjerna wrote:
Your entire sacred text is a 'long-winded treatise on peace and love' -- at the expense of other cultures, might I add.
Interesting to note that you agree with Amarrian traditionnalists on the interpretation of the Book of Reclaiming.
I seriously doubt that any traditionalist believes that the BoR is about "peace and love".

"There will be neither compassion nor mercy;
Nor peace, nor solace
For those who bear witness to these Signs
And still do not believe."

- The Scriptures, Book of Reclaiming 25:10

Trying to turn that into a message of peace and love requires the kind of blindness only certain Amarrians on IGS can muster.
Lyn Farel
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#22 - 2011-12-14 18:10:23 UTC
Astrid Stjerna wrote:
Lyn Farel wrote:
Astrid Stjerna wrote:
Your entire sacred text is a 'long-winded treatise on peace and love' -- at the expense of other cultures, might I add.


Interesting to note that you agree with Amarrian traditionnalists on the interpretation of the Book of Reclaiming.


*Astrid snorts in derision*

Considering that even the traditionalists can't agree on that particular point, I'd hardly consider that even a minor victory.


They can not ?

Arkady Sadik wrote:
I seriously doubt that any traditionalist believes that the BoR is about "peace and love".

"There will be neither compassion nor mercy;
Nor peace, nor solace
For those who bear witness to these Signs
And still do not believe."

- The Scriptures, Book of Reclaiming 25:10

Trying to turn that into a message of peace and love requires the kind of blindness only certain Amarrians on IGS can muster.


Thank you for stating the obvious, but I have difficulties to see what this has to do with what I said.
Myxx
The Scope
#23 - 2011-12-14 18:55:07 UTC
Myxx wrote:
And that is why peace can never be truly found. I somewhat agree with you, Saxon, but some people just can't see beyond themselves and their chosen causes.

Continue to prove me right, thanks.
Jon Engel
Machete Carbide
#24 - 2011-12-14 18:57:51 UTC
Lyn Farel wrote:
Astrid Stjerna wrote:
Your entire sacred text is a 'long-winded treatise on peace and love' -- at the expense of other cultures, might I add.


Interesting to note that you agree with Amarrian traditionnalists on the interpretation of the Book of Reclaiming.

Jon Engel wrote:
You fight because Concord told you that you could fight. They even dictated where you could fight and what you could fight over. I don't recall the CEP or Gallentean Senate issuing a formal declaration of war.


Right after the Caldari blockade in Luminaire, if you remember correctly, the Federation Senate backed by Foiritan actually did declare war against the Caldari State.

You are only right on the fact that CONCORD dictates and restricts where proxy enlisted people can wage this war.



So where are they hiding the war at? Last I checked they pay capsuleers to supposedly fight a war for them instead. Barring a limited few engagements, nothing is spoken of any warfront among the two navies of Caldari and Gallente.

The "war' is nothing but a distraction from the political stagnation of the Federation and the impending economic failure of the Caldari State's fiscal behavior and monetary policy.
Faelan Maris
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#25 - 2011-12-14 22:32:13 UTC
"Jeane DuPont" wrote:
Peace is something you can find among the youngest of children by instinct. It is the proof that peace is automatic where people are not yet corrupted by their own mundane interests that elder people happen to have just because they "grew up".

Do you spend much time among children? Violence, cruelty, selfishness, and injustice are just as common if not moreso among children left to their own devices as they are between adults, and more common than peace is in my experience. I have watched unsupervised children "playing" in both the State and Republic and seen how horrible they can be to each other. I have not spent any time among Amarrian children but I did observe many small perfidies between Gallente and Intaki children on my trip to the Crystal Boulevard, so I am sure that they are no angels either. I suspect that children everywhere are much the same.

I have also seen how a "mundane" elder can turn those misguided aggressions into small moments of unity and learning experiences. Children need guidance to find a moral path, not instinct. Instinct makes them pull the wings off of butterflies and push around smaller and younger children. I realize that many adults teach their children bad habits and biases (e.g. witness the next response I will make here), but good habits are even more dependent on learning.
Arkady Sadik
Gradient
Electus Matari
#26 - 2011-12-14 22:46:35 UTC
No child is ever unguided. They always mimic the behavior of others they see and interact with. Children who grow up with nothing to mimic are not fit to live at all. The mere idea of observing "pure instinct" is broken by design.

I also recommend reading your favorite encyclopedia's entries on "naturalistic fallacy" and "is-ought problem".
Faelan Maris
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#27 - 2011-12-14 22:57:52 UTC
And here is my second response, proving both the horrors of being taught prejudice by ones elders and Myxx's contribution to the discussion:
"Seriphyn Inhonores" wrote:
Soldiers of the Federation are taught and trained in the values you very much speak of, Suresha. We are peacekeepers and defenders of ideals. Contrast this to those in Caldari; serve the State, unquestioningly and unwaveringly. There's no thought given to such esoteric ideas. If the State moves that way, it moves, and you follow. But a soldier in the Federation is intrinsically a political being as well. We must know why we fight, it is not enough to know that we're doing some duty for some state that allegedly would have the best interests of the greater good at heart.

I am a little surprised to hear this from you, LG. I believe that the first discussion where we crossed paths you stated that you were trained as a simple soldier and just went where you were told and did what you were told and did not worry about the philosophy of it. This was some months back and one of the livelier conversations I have seen in NEA, so it was somewhat memorable and distant enough that I may be misquoting you. I shall have to go looking to see if I still have copies of the logs to make sure that I am not misrepresenting you too horribly.

I do not disagree entirely with your characterization of the State, at least as far as military and security forces go. You do follow the orders you are given, or your superiors find someone who will follow and you find yourself transferred and demoted - or possibly killed on the spot, for example if you are blatantly disregarding orders and endangering your peers in the middle of a firefight. But even for soldiers - and moreso for scientists and executives - the best and most successful people in the State find creative ways to forge their own path without insulting or directly contradicting their superiors. Following orders to the letter usually leads to a safe life, but one that is confined to a narrow niche, and in the State if you have any ambitions you need to balance obedience and initiative.

I suspect that these things are much the same for the Federation, so perhaps you or someone else could educate me a bit. What happens to a Gallente soldier who chooses to disregard orders? Are your soldiers actually allowed to ignore their superiors if they disagree with orders on political grounds, or because the soldier believes he or she has a more morally-appropriate opinion on how to proceed? I seriously doubt it, but I am willing to listen if I am wrong. However I am almost certain that you are doing nothing more than showing your usual ingrained hatred by contrasting the "enlightened Gallente" and "thuggish Caldari", and I am doing nothing more than having my usual kneejerk reaction to your acid, and we just go as another weary example of the already amply-made point that we are all flawed and fractious beings.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#28 - 2011-12-14 23:16:40 UTC
No society under an anarchistic structure (or non-structure to be more precise) ever declared war on anybody.


Bring back DEEEEP Space!

Faelan Maris
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#29 - 2011-12-14 23:41:55 UTC
Captain Hawke, I do not mean to unleash my fangs in your thread - especially as a piece almost diametrically opposed in tone to what I have posted so far - without a nod to you as well. I cannot refute any point you have made. The path our peoples are set upon - of violence, of hatred, of building for war rather than investing in peace - all of these things are accurate. The suggestion that embracing peace would allow us to focus better on building more prosperous societies and finding a just solution to all of our grievances - also likely true. But I think the will is not there, at least for us.

Obviously I cannot speak for the Federation - let the disavowals and jingoistic speech of others suffice.

For the part of the State, I think I can impart an impression of the mood where I have lived and traveled. We have had our revolution, and what you see is the result. There is more hope, more just and visible rewards for both merit and failure, and a new prosperity. There is a new sense of purpose, and a resurgent pride in being Caldari. What there is not is a new hankering for peace. We are set more firmly on the path of conflict with the Federation than at any point since the last war petered out, and that will not change easily. I think it would require another flashpoint for us - a Malkalen of goodwill rather than ill - and a counterrevolution more drastic than anything I have seen in my lifetime to shift us so far. I do not see it happening.

I am sorry for your call to a greater good. Your sentiments and people like the Disciples of Ston put the rest of us to shame. But, flawed as we are, we each must walk our own path, and for the most part our feet face in another direction.

That said, my experience is not all-encompassing and others may disagree - for example Ishukone has made efforts to bridge the divide - so maybe there is more hope for you than what I have to say.
Jeane DuPont
DuPont Enterprises
Perpetual Alliance
#30 - 2011-12-14 23:45:24 UTC
Faelan Maris wrote:
Instinct makes them pull the wings off of butterflies and push around smaller and younger children. I realize that many adults teach their children bad habits and biases (e.g. witness the next response I will make here), but good habits are even more dependent on learning.


Yes, maybe I wasn't clear enough with my statement.

What I tried to say is that peace is such a condition that you don't have to explain it because its simple. Such simplicity can be found only in the pure reasoning of the youngest of children that, as you said, pull off the wings of butterflies and push around smaller and younger children not because they are being "bad", but because they are being inocent. This has nothing to do with war, nor with peace as someone needs tons of words to describe.

Cheers
Vechtor
DuPont Enterprises
Perpetual Alliance
#31 - 2011-12-14 23:48:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Vechtor
Faelan Maris wrote:


Obviously I cannot speak for the Federation - let the disavowals and jingoistic speech of others suffice.



Don't worry... Mr. Hawke doesn't speak for the Intaki...neither for the Federation.
Khendaal
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#32 - 2011-12-14 23:58:24 UTC
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
No society under an anarchistic structure (or non-structure to be more precise) ever declared war on anybody.




There is no such thing as a peaceful society under an anarchistic [anti]structure. It simply can not exist. From the New Eden Intergalactic Dictionary (3rd ed.):


an·ar·chist  [an-er-kist]
noun
1. a person who advocates or believes in anarchy or anarchism.
2. a person who seeks to overturn by violence all constituted forms and institutions of society and government, with no purpose of establishing any other system of order in the place of that destroyed.
3. a person who promotes disorder or excites revolt against any established rule, law, or custom
Faelan Maris
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#33 - 2011-12-15 00:00:17 UTC  |  Edited by: Faelan Maris
Arkady Sadik wrote:
No child is ever unguided. They always mimic the behavior of others they see and interact with. Children who grow up with nothing to mimic are not fit to live at all. The mere idea of observing "pure instinct" is broken by design.

I also recommend reading your favorite encyclopedia's entries on "naturalistic fallacy" and "is-ought problem".

I should think that my posts prove me an uneducated and awkward philosopher. From a short reading on both topics I agree with your objection but it does not contradict my basic point - that we as human beings are at least as prone to violence as peace, and that peace is not a more natural state than conflict. That is based on an observation of several of our cultures, and what seems to be prevalent in all of them from an early age. Barring a sufficiently persuasive cluster-wide analysis demonstrating otherwise, I will choose to believe my eyes in this.

(I have edited this to remove any references to Captain DuPont's statements, in light of her clarification.)
Faelan Maris
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#34 - 2011-12-15 00:02:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Faelan Maris
Jeane DuPont wrote:
Yes, maybe I wasn't clear enough with my statement.

What I tried to say is that peace is such a condition that you don't have to explain it because its simple. Such simplicity can be found only in the pure reasoning of the youngest of children that, as you said, pull off the wings of butterflies and push around smaller and younger children not because they are being "bad", but because they are being inocent. This has nothing to do with war, nor with peace as someone needs tons of words to describe.

I did completely misinterpret your point. You have my apologies.
Arkady Sadik
Gradient
Electus Matari
#35 - 2011-12-15 07:18:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Arkady Sadik
Faelan Maris wrote:
From a short reading on both topics I agree with your objection but it does not contradict my basic point - that we as human beings are at least as prone to violence as peace, and that peace is not a more natural state than conflict.
The objection was not against that observation (and hence more a reply to your foreposter than you), but against the attempts to draw any conclusions from that observation.

It is irrelevant for an ethics debate what is a "more natural" state.

(Those who feel that "more natural" states are somehow inherently superior should deplug themselves from their pods and stop posting on this fine forum.)
Rodj Blake
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
#36 - 2011-12-15 15:09:27 UTC
Arkady Sadik wrote:
I seriously doubt that any traditionalist believes that the BoR is about "peace and love".

"There will be neither compassion nor mercy;
Nor peace, nor solace
For those who bear witness to these Signs
And still do not believe."

- The Scriptures, Book of Reclaiming 25:10

Trying to turn that into a message of peace and love requires the kind of blindness only certain Amarrians on IGS can muster.


That phrase implies that compassion, mercy, peace and solace will all be enjoyed by those who do believe once the Reclaiming is over.

Dolce et decorum est pro Imperium mori

Lyn Farel
Societas Imperialis Sceptri Coronaeque
Khimi Harar
#37 - 2011-12-15 18:31:12 UTC
Jon Engel wrote:
Lyn Farel wrote:
Astrid Stjerna wrote:
Your entire sacred text is a 'long-winded treatise on peace and love' -- at the expense of other cultures, might I add.


Interesting to note that you agree with Amarrian traditionnalists on the interpretation of the Book of Reclaiming.

Jon Engel wrote:
You fight because Concord told you that you could fight. They even dictated where you could fight and what you could fight over. I don't recall the CEP or Gallentean Senate issuing a formal declaration of war.


Right after the Caldari blockade in Luminaire, if you remember correctly, the Federation Senate backed by Foiritan actually did declare war against the Caldari State.

You are only right on the fact that CONCORD dictates and restricts where proxy enlisted people can wage this war.



So where are they hiding the war at? Last I checked they pay capsuleers to supposedly fight a war for them instead. Barring a limited few engagements, nothing is spoken of any warfront among the two navies of Caldari and Gallente.

The "war' is nothing but a distraction from the political stagnation of the Federation and the impending economic failure of the Caldari State's fiscal behavior and monetary policy.


Who "they" ? The 4 empires ? Of course they pay capsuleers to fight for a war they wanted in the first place. It is quite fortunate that CONCORD intervened, or you would have prefered a war involving the whole cluster population and planets ?

What is a shame, though, is what CONCORD did is actually not enough.
Mammal Tafren
Intaki Liberation Front
Intaki Prosperity Initiative
#38 - 2011-12-17 06:17:03 UTC
Vechtor wrote:
Faelan Maris wrote:


Obviously I cannot speak for the Federation - let the disavowals and jingoistic speech of others suffice.



Don't worry... Mr. Hawke doesn't speak for the Intaki...neither for the Federation.


This is true for all of us, thankfully.

It's a deep slide into ignorance isn't it?
Andreus Ixiris
Duty.
SE7EN-SINS
#39 - 2011-12-17 09:03:55 UTC
Rodj Blake wrote:
That phrase implies that compassion, mercy, peace and solace will all be enjoyed by those who do believe once the Reclaiming is over.


This will most likely be because all of the Amarrians who believe in the Reclaiming will be dead.

Andreus Ixiris > A Civire without a chin is barely a Civire at all.

Pieter Tuulinen > He'd be Civirely disadvantaged, Andreus.

Andreus Ixiris > ...

Andreus Ixiris > This is why we're at war.

Vechtor
DuPont Enterprises
Perpetual Alliance
#40 - 2011-12-17 10:13:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Vechtor
Mammal Tafren wrote:


This is true for all of us, thankfully.



Exactly.

Only difference is that some of us never intended.

By the way you and your organization are the ones who can speak the least about peace (Mr. Hawke included) as you've engaged in military actions against Caldari MIlitia forces for several times. This is public information and it ruins your credibility. Or Mr. Hawke's. You can't speak about peace when you take sides...
Previous page123Next page