Ask Your Question today
Pure freedom or pure peace?
Pure peace would mean no conflicts between anyone but at the cost of freedom due to people being controlled. Pure freedom can result is conflict arising though one would have the freedom to at least pursue peace.
That was my opinion, what is yours?
| Pure freedom | 71 | |
| Pure peace | 60 |
If your peace sacrifices the freedom of another, it is not pure peace. What you seek is balance.
If everything/everyone was controlled someone would eventually rebel and there would no longer be "pure peace"
In the second option (pure freedom), one could live in peace without having to sacrifice freedom.
But remember, people have the freedom to disturb the peace. Living freely and peacefully is possible but I can only see that on a small scale.
I remember reading a quote given to me by a friend, it says: "As long as man has free will there will never be peace", or something along the lines of that and I can remember who said it.
Can't have peace without freedom and without freedom there will never be peace.
if i have freedom, freedom will come to those i love
and so on
and man is such an animal, he wants freedom, even at the cost of peace
fuck other's peace. if i want freedom, i want it.
without freedom i don't get how you are saying it, but you can't have peace
i think i would prefer being a lone wolf, i dont like company that much, unless i know who i am with or i am friends with the individual.
freedom can lead to chaos. I'm guessing pure peace insinuates no religion, so I choose that one
You can never have pure peace. Peace can only be attained when everyone has their rights shut down and not even then. So the better is definitely pure freedom. Because when a society is truly free crime rates go jump WAY down. Look at states with strict gun laws and look at their crime rate. Now look at states with loose gun laws and look at their crime rate. See what I'm saying? The person who said they choose peace over freedom is probably for gun control. I respond by saying get your head out of your ass you aren't helping anyone out. If a criminal wants a fucking gun he will get it whether its legal or not.
That's a good question. In fact, it's such a good question that I really can't answer it. Maybe I'll come back tomorrow when I've had more time to think.
I'm actually surprised I 'stumped' someone as wise as you. Hope you can let that pun 'go through to the keeper'.
Freedom is overrated. There would be total anarchy in a world of pure freedom. One person's freedom will always violate somebody else's. Is freedom even useful? How can it be measured, how would it benefit humanity? Without peace, it probably wouldn't.
If freedom is overrated, then why do so many people fight and give their lives for freedom? Dictators free themselves but enslave the people. They don't name them 'freedom fighters' for nothing.
The American War of Independance, the French and Russian revolutions, most wars. What do they have in common? People fighting for their own freedom and to stop those people who wish to rule over others (dictators). Libya right now is a prime example.
Peace. What is freedom anyway? For there to be total freedom a man has to have the choice to impose on another's freedom. It's a self contradicting principle.
A better question is: What are rights? What purpose do they serve? Can they be measured in the physical?