Coffee time.
How Can We Achieve World Peace?
Re: How Can We Achieve World Peace?
No one expects the Spanish Inquisition.
You are tying up your poor brain with too many negatives.
Re: How Can We Achieve World Peace?
To that I say ... you're wrong.
The motive of the negatives is for your interest, solely, seeing as how the more lenthy, thoughtful, serious posting relevant to world peace is beneath your attention ... seeing as how you display no evidence of comprehension, dear fellow.
The motive of all the negatives is for you to find the positive meaning.
Quite a clever metaphor in action, wouldn't you agree?
Re: How Can We Achieve World Peace?
I would never not disagree, since not disagreeing is never not anti-reason.Walker wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2024 12:52 pmTo that I say ... you're wrong.
The motive of the negatives is for your interest, solely, seeing as how the more lenthy, thoughtful, serious posting relevant to world peace is beneath your attention ... seeing as how you display no evidence of comprehension, dear fellow.
The motive of all the negatives is for you to find the positive meaning.
Quite a clever metaphor in action, wouldn't you agree?
Re: How Can We Achieve World Peace?
Philosophy Now
War
5 May 2024
How Can We Achieve World Peace
Pacifism is the opposition to war, the ruin of some is the ruin of all. Pacifism is non-violence. Pacifism destroys everyone. Nocentes are not engaged in or causing harm, moralities are attacking civilians. Noncentes are not free in or bring about harm. Noncentes are values in attacking civilians. Should realism be deontological, common sense in thinking? Realism being common sense and cannot help but know. Realism should be right regardless of the harm. Just war is simple in that some wars are just, wanting to moralize war. Just war uses ius ad bellum and jus in bello. Just war wanting to moralize war.
War violence and should be deontological morality that is, a priori and not outside values. War is violence and deontological morality. War should be a priori and not outside values. Assume validity is of principles, philosophy is the formulation of precise and rigorous. Assume validity is of propositions. Assuming, validity’s formulations being precise and rigorous.
Peace the ultimate goal of war, of all politics (Augustine 19:10-13.) Peace the aim of war (19:10-13.) Peace harmony of all politics (19:10-13.) God can be shared, no loss to any. (15:3-5.) God among the people seeks no loss to all (15:3-5.) God’s allotment.
Both realists and pacifists are not the just war theory, which are ius ad bellum and jus in bello. Both the realist and the pacifists are not the just war theory. Both realists and pacifists are about ius ad bellum and jus in bello.
Hoping, not question begging in my essay, morals should govern war. Not question begging in my essay. Morals should govern war. Having, shown peace is achieved in many different traditions. Peace has many different definitions. Peace was shown by different traditions. Showing, my analytical semantic philosophy is war, "For everything there is a season, and a matter under heaven; ... A time to kill and a time to heal." "For everything there is a season ... A time to embrace ...." This is my opinion, which has information, but I could be wrong.
Work Cited
Augustine, “The peace of the Earthly City,” City of God, book 19.)
Perkins, Pheme. The New Oxford Annotated Bible with Apocrypha: New Revised
Standard Version (p. 939). Oxford University Press. Kindle Edition.
War
5 May 2024
How Can We Achieve World Peace
Pacifism is the opposition to war, the ruin of some is the ruin of all. Pacifism is non-violence. Pacifism destroys everyone. Nocentes are not engaged in or causing harm, moralities are attacking civilians. Noncentes are not free in or bring about harm. Noncentes are values in attacking civilians. Should realism be deontological, common sense in thinking? Realism being common sense and cannot help but know. Realism should be right regardless of the harm. Just war is simple in that some wars are just, wanting to moralize war. Just war uses ius ad bellum and jus in bello. Just war wanting to moralize war.
War violence and should be deontological morality that is, a priori and not outside values. War is violence and deontological morality. War should be a priori and not outside values. Assume validity is of principles, philosophy is the formulation of precise and rigorous. Assume validity is of propositions. Assuming, validity’s formulations being precise and rigorous.
Peace the ultimate goal of war, of all politics (Augustine 19:10-13.) Peace the aim of war (19:10-13.) Peace harmony of all politics (19:10-13.) God can be shared, no loss to any. (15:3-5.) God among the people seeks no loss to all (15:3-5.) God’s allotment.
Both realists and pacifists are not the just war theory, which are ius ad bellum and jus in bello. Both the realist and the pacifists are not the just war theory. Both realists and pacifists are about ius ad bellum and jus in bello.
Hoping, not question begging in my essay, morals should govern war. Not question begging in my essay. Morals should govern war. Having, shown peace is achieved in many different traditions. Peace has many different definitions. Peace was shown by different traditions. Showing, my analytical semantic philosophy is war, "For everything there is a season, and a matter under heaven; ... A time to kill and a time to heal." "For everything there is a season ... A time to embrace ...." This is my opinion, which has information, but I could be wrong.
Work Cited
Augustine, “The peace of the Earthly City,” City of God, book 19.)
Perkins, Pheme. The New Oxford Annotated Bible with Apocrypha: New Revised
Standard Version (p. 939). Oxford University Press. Kindle Edition.
Re: How Can We Achieve World Peace?
I am sorry, as it may have been an ideological thesis; I think I already knew the answer. Sorry; I already knew the answer. It may have been ideological in reasoning. I did the research; then answered wrong. The research was correct; the answer wrong.