The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: the science of world peace  (Read 7292 times)

Offline fidocancan

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
    • http://www.davidpinto.org
the science of world peace
« on: 16/08/2005 21:01:48 »
I am not going to warble on about the political situation. I suspect, if you are reading this, you know enough about the political situation, and you are aware that news regarding the political situation isnít exactly new.

I also assume you have some understanding of the economic situation, regarding the delicate nature of aid-funding, third-world debt, flight-capital, and your own personal experience of credit. You have your own ideas, informed by your own experience. Thatís OK too.

And, perhaps, you have some sensitivity to your own responsibility regarding the ecology of the planet, where you have a moral responsibility to ensure that the planet is passed down to your children in a better condition than you inherited. This is as close to a spiritual acknowledgement as you might find here at The Naked Scientist. But you know how Muslims and Christians are facing off, and that doesnít fill you with a huge amount of hope.

So, hereís the solution. Letís give ourselves the opportunity for world peace by 2020.

I have been careful with the wording, of course. I canít guarantee we will have world peace. Neither can you. It isnít even a plan for achieving it. It is merely an invitation. To create the opportunity for world peace.

This may sound fru-fru at first, but I am a mathematician at heart and I am interested in self-organising systems. As a society, we comprise a self-organising system, a little messier than most because of our consciousness, admittedly. I believe it is possible to approach the solution of world peace with a rigourous, scientific methodology.

Rather than witter on, try this.

Consider the probability of world peace occuring at 2020. A percentage, the chance of world peace by 2020. You may also wish to consider some alternatives, like annihilation or major ecological disaster, or a more-or-less stable status quo which inherits most of the economic imbalances we see around us today.

Go on, think about the probability. It wonít have any value if you donít think about it. After all, you might try this little thinking experiment on your friends, and they will no doubt ask you what you thought.

So, a little feedback. It isnít zero. Ask a maths friend if you donít understand it. If you think of a percentage more than 1%, you are unusual, and good luck to you. The chances are, you are from a religious background since you are slightly inaccurate regarding the current social dynamics and level of awareness. To be anything near realistic (and you have to be a realist if you really want to have world peace), the chances are tiny, less than 0.000000001% if that.

Now, if you have survived that, a second question. Has the probability of world peace occuring by 2020 increased or decreased as a result of your reading this article?

Again, give it some thought.

OK?

Well, your response to that question indicates a few things. If you thought no, it doesnít change it all, then you are absolving yourself of your own existence. You have something like information in your head, and then you have your own being that does stuff and is connected to the world, through the actions of your job and interests and so on. In fact, it is innevitable that the chances of world peace increase by the very fact you are aware of this. To make this point more obvious, if everyone on the planet was aware of 2020 as a date for world peace, then the chance of it happening obviously increase (perhaps as high as 0.001%, who knows?). And if you thought it decreases, then you are part of the problem, not the solution and hopefully one day youíll meet someone sweet enough or precise enough to inspire you to changing your mind.

Of course, the question that might spring up is: it depends on how much I believe that it is possible. Aha, and hereís the crux. For, if we have, say, 1 billion people who are convinced that world peace is possible in the year 2020, and there are, say, several million who have been preparing for it for years, then the chance might actually break the 1% mark. Now, thatís worth thinking about, donít you think?


OK, enough of the thought experiment. Go ahead, try it on your friends. Email some responses, arguments, whatever. And if you are interested in this precision, you might want to check out page 457 in a book called Truth By David Ė donít be put of by the title, it is merely there to challenge the ego. There are about forty little entries which create a multidimensional concept web which is respectful of you and what you already have in your head.

And to finish as I began, respecting what you already know. I suspect that the major problem facing us now, is not so much new information, is what to do with what we already know. It is about prioritising, and in our each little way, contributing to a better global situation.

You see, I actually do believe it is possible to have world peace by 2020, and for me, itís more to do with maths than belief.


 

Offline finchbeak

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 45
    • View Profile
Re: the science of world peace
« Reply #1 on: 17/08/2005 19:51:34 »
So if enough people read your ideas, then the probability can increase to 100%!

C'mon everyone, let's play Spot the Flaw.
 

Offline David Sparkman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 234
    • View Profile
Re: the science of world peace
« Reply #2 on: 18/08/2005 04:03:54 »
Last I read there were over 100 wars going on this year. We know of the big ones. Most of the world is still ruled by petty power hungry dictators. So I don't think you will get the wars down to zero by 2020.

And then there is economic warfare as conducted by democracies on each other. With France and Japan protecting their farmers so the same old politicians can be reelected. But at least fewer people die in those wars or starve or freeze to death due to lack of economic activity in such societies.

The organization charged with maintaning the peace chooses to ignore a little genocide in Africa, steals 4 billion in oil money 'cause they are a little corrupt, and allowes a nation to not only be a member but to be in charge of the committee on human rights that has a terrible human rights record. I think it is true, the asylem is being run by the inmates.

David
« Last Edit: 18/08/2005 04:04:49 by David Sparkman »
 

Offline DrN

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 815
    • View Profile
Re: the science of world peace
« Reply #3 on: 19/08/2005 16:40:39 »
you'll never get rid of war as long as there are humans. Its human nature. 'survival of the fittest' at its extreme maybe.
 

Offline David Sparkman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 234
    • View Profile
Re: the science of world peace
« Reply #4 on: 20/08/2005 02:56:23 »
Ah, now we have a culprit: Darwin did it. Lets blame him hehe...

David
 

Offline Simmer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 229
    • View Profile
Re: the science of world peace
« Reply #5 on: 20/08/2005 22:10:45 »
I think the flaw is in the assumption that everyone will want world peace in 2020.  You might think that they would but suppose instead of 2020 we said tomorrow?  

How many people around the world tomorrow would say "World peace, great, but only after we've dealt with those evil <fill in mortal enemy name here>.  

Why should it be any different in 15 years time?
 

Offline simeonie

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 351
    • View Profile
    • http://www.simeonie.co.uk
Re: the science of world peace
« Reply #6 on: 20/08/2005 23:56:45 »
Just because people think that world peace might be possible by 2020 does not by any means increase the possibility of it actually happening. Does it?

Because to be honest with you, it is possbible for world peace by 2020 because there is the very slightest chance that something might happen to allow that. Think about it, it is POSSIBLE, I would have thought most people would think that. Doesnt mean it will happen though

----------------------
http://www.simeonie.co.uk
Check it out. Click on the forums
« Last Edit: 20/08/2005 23:58:09 by simeonie »
 

Offline finchbeak

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 45
    • View Profile
Re: the science of world peace
« Reply #7 on: 21/08/2005 00:02:41 »
Not bad, Simmer.

I have to admit that I've had some fun thinking about this for a few days.  Thanks fido.

Similar to Simmer's summary (try that 10x fast), I have difficulty with the definition of "world peace."  I don't know what that looks like.  I can imagine many ways of improving the economic/political/ecological status quo, most of which involve convincing my own government to begin behaving less boorishly.  However, I don't really know what "world peace" would be and I suspect that, with almost 7 billion people on the planet, there would be almost 7 billion different definitions.  I'm afraid that, without a clear vision, I am unable to estimate a probability.  Does that make me a part of the problem?  I'll take the heat instead of Darwin, if that helps.  Darwin deserves a break.
 

Offline fidocancan

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
    • http://www.davidpinto.org
Re: the science of world peace
« Reply #8 on: 31/08/2005 18:08:16 »
a little cheap, me thinks
 

Offline fidocancan

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
    • http://www.davidpinto.org
Re: the science of world peace
« Reply #9 on: 31/08/2005 18:10:01 »
you are right, of course, and valuable that you should wish to point this out to me.
whatever the situation now, i believe it may be useful for us to plan ahead.
wouldn't you agree?
 

Offline fidocancan

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
    • http://www.davidpinto.org
Re: the science of world peace
« Reply #10 on: 31/08/2005 18:11:24 »
we can get rid of institutional violence.
and besides, we solved survival of the fittest a long time ago, what we are dealing with here, is greed, wanting more than we have.
 

Offline fidocancan

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
    • http://www.davidpinto.org
Re: the science of world peace
« Reply #11 on: 31/08/2005 18:16:50 »
thanks for your comment, fincher
as some other people have noted, regarding the present situation, i don't think we are in a great position to define what world peace might actually be. however, if there is an invitation to think about it, and then to build on various social feedback cycles which we could introduce from now (the time you are reading this) and 2020, we might have a better picture of what it might actually be.
after, we wouldn't want to rob your 2020 version of you, and the wisdom you will have accrued over the years.
it is a matter of thinking about thing in the right way, combined with right action, and, hopefully, we get a clearer and more practical idea of what it may actually turn out to be.
otherwise, we are just arguing here, in the middle of nowhere, with no effect.
still, as my first attempt to voice this beyond writing a book about it, i am, quite frankly, heartened.
thanks all.
 

Offline Tronix

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 59
    • View Profile
Re: the science of world peace
« Reply #12 on: 01/09/2005 00:52:49 »
i think the point hes tryign to get at is that cynismism isnt goign to help. I dont think we will have world peace until 1. humanity evolves to a new level or 2. until there is another Wolrd to inhabit, as humans seem to like to partion things off its "good side of town" and "bad side of town", and thus can happen with "o thats a bad planet to be on" and "this is a great palent to raise kids on".

However, i do think that most of the comments here are merely lowering the statistic. And another point, i think of stats as inherintly flawed, paticually with the chaotic life-form of humanity (you may argue with me on that, but i rather think that the ability to go agiasnt natural order) is our inherent strong point.

WHich brings me to the point of world peice. You are right. It is in human nature to disagree, which turns into violence when disagreements get intense. Evial and Good are also in human nature.

However, humanity has seemily defied nature from the get go, and that may be the only nature we frequently obey. Humans frequently change their entire psyches for various reasons, and by this inherent cability the possiblity of true world peace automatically exsists, and is likely based on the number of people putting effort into making it happen (not the number of those that think its possible, cuz i think the world can be blown up by tommorow, but im not doing anything to make it happen).

Personally, i dont think math (or at least our level of being able to comprehend math) is made for this sort of thing, as i just see to often humanity breakign its own rules. Hell, in a way, these rules are of human interpretation, and our patterns are are own make. So is our disorder.

In the great scheme of ecology, i think humans have evovled, by luck or design, into the keepers of the enviroment, there own included, simply becuase of the combined power of 6 billion humans, all willful individuals. Whiel nature continues to humble us with raw force (liek those whom lost their lives and homes by the wrath of the Hurricane Katrinia, (Give them rest and shelter), and will loose more by the spread of disease and rioting), we still have a mighty influence on nature (as we may very well destroy the very climate with our pollution and other ecological crimes). And alot of the time we do nothign becuase our own human created enviromants, form cities to governments, is in just as much disarray. IF we can bring at least homeostasis to our self-created enviroments, then perhaps we can keep our earth alive, as destiny or not, we have been given the ability to bring mother earth to her knees with technology, numbers and sheer carelessness, and at the same time, fuffil a purpose never imagined. Hell we may be the only way for life to spread through our solar system.

which is why i, very unscientifically, do not give up on the silliest chance for world peace. its my hope i can make the world a better place with my expertise, and logic and reason be damned to stop me.

--------------------------------------------
"If i cannot have company whose minds are clearly free, I would prefer to go alone."                  -Dr. Gideon Lincecum

The BPRD rejected my application becuase their brain-controled by Cthulhu Rip-offs. And im sure "Sparky" is sleeping with them too, kinky little firecracker she is...
 

Offline Simmer

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 229
    • View Profile
Re: the science of world peace
« Reply #13 on: 03/09/2005 23:16:21 »
That's the spirit, Tronix.  Don't listen to us nasty cynics, only idealists can change the world :-)
 

Offline Ultima

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 488
    • View Profile
    • My Homepage
Re: the science of world peace
« Reply #14 on: 04/09/2005 11:44:53 »
Need some peep to rule with an iron fist saying "YOU WILL HAVE PEACE! MY KIND OF PEACE" oh wait that's been tried before... Never works out, people don't like to be forced or coerced into anything... World peace is never going to happen. What you want is open world trade etc. with a more global political system, like the UN but not crap. That way you have a stable world environment and a bit of time and luck people will forget that they have hated each other for thousands of years for no reason.

wOw the world spins?
 

Offline David Sparkman

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 234
    • View Profile
Re: the science of world peace
« Reply #15 on: 04/09/2005 15:09:55 »
A real bad war will sometimes help, when people realize the alternative to peace is death and destruction. We in the US needed the civil war to even begin to overcome the competition between the states like the EU has now.

There are always those who see an opertunity to grab power or riches at the expense of another. Someone is going to do it, why not me is the attitude I see most. Try to pick good men to govern is all I can say.

David
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: the science of world peace
« Reply #15 on: 04/09/2005 15:09:55 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums