| Question Home |
Position:Home>Philosophy> Is pacifism noble or immoral?Question: Is pacifism noble or immoral!? The doctrine of pacifism (or pacifism) is defined as the opposition to violence of any kind--at a personal level, or a national level in the form of war!. Pacifists say their belief/philosophy is noble and highly moral!. Critics say pacifism is unrealistic and actually immoral!.
Your thoughts!.!.!.!? Www@QuestionHome@Com Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: I would say it's naive!. It would be nice if we could always count on peace to achieve all our ends!. It really would!. And it CAN accomplish quite a few of them!. But the world we occupy is not a peaceful place!. No amount of sit-ins are going to stop a volcano from erupting or even a biochemical abnormality from prompting another human to become sociopathic!. And who can say what else is waiting for us in the universe that we have yet to discover!? A species that chooses not to defend itself by ANY means necessary is probably doomed to eventually be exterminated by that means they choose not to employ!. This is all but an evolutionary truism!. “In peace prepare for war, in war prepare for peace!. The art of war is of vital importance to the state!. It is matter of life and death, a road either to safety or to ruin!. Under no circumstances can it be neglected!.” - Sun Tzu Www@QuestionHome@Com Pacifism can be either noble or immoral depending on the conditions when it's practiced!. At a practical level pacifism has only been successful when it is used against a regime that believes justice is on the side of the pacifists!. Gandhi succeed in India because the British had stopped believing that they should govern India!. If Nazis had won WW2 and taken control over India from the British they would have made Gandhi into a lampshade!. King succeed in ending the Jim Crow laws because most Americans believed in equality under the law!. In most other cases pacifism is the tool of the foolish who don't believe in the reality of evil people!. Generally this pacifism is a cover for those who truly are cowards!. Www@QuestionHome@Com pacifism (P) and moral (M) or immoral (I) P+M=Right (those who support it) P+I=Right (those who support it) Then we have PM=PI (cancel right) M=I (cancel Peace) We can not end the debate, if what is moral is equal to what is imoral then where is the reference!? The answer is Peace, but peace do not apprear in debate of this moral or immoral! b/c i think it is Peace is not a thing debated; rather it is absolute necessity! Www@QuestionHome@Com it depends on the person and the reason and follow through on their believes!.!.!. true pacifism as espoused by ghandi is VERY noble!.!. as well as very useless!.!.!. mostly in my experience pacifists simply lack convictions of any believes and so have nothing to fight for!.!. it is easy to be a pacifist!.!. when you believe in nothing!. Www@QuestionHome@Com I wouldn't say immoral!. I'd say formatory!. Automatic thinking!. Not valid!. Suppose the American Revolution was King George on one side and a bunch of tulip eating Ghandi's on our side!. We'd STILL be sucking English Bob to this day!. There's a time for everything, even violence!. Sorry, but that's just how it is!.Www@QuestionHome@Com It certainly isn't immoral!. Yes, people SAY it's unrealistic!. But they fail to realize how counterproductive violence is!. Pacifism is not only not immoral, it's the most effective means of genuinely good change!. Violence mostly just begets more violence!.Www@QuestionHome@Com Never have I seen an argument against pacifism that has survived even the slightest bit of scrutiny!.Www@QuestionHome@Com It was the tool of choice for Gandhi and Martin Luther King!. These were men that really got Things Done!. Www@QuestionHome@Com |