The Futility of Peace

I have been reflecting on ‘types of power‘ recently, which has tipped me into thinking about peace. Some power is defined internally, by our ability to influence or command, whilst another type is defined in opposition: by holding the contrary view, we may hold a certain type of power. Conflict feels inevitable: when worldviews collide, when dogma meets fact, when cultures collide, when self interest differs.

The Futility of Peace

We tend to tip to argument before debate: perhaps debate requires a humility to relinquish control of the story, whilst argument reinforces our position through a type of internal validity: i assert, thus believe, thus am validated. All the better if you believe in me. Losing an argument does not simply mean losing control of ‘facts’, it reflects a diminution of corresponding power too.

About julianstodd

Author, Artist, Researcher, and Founder of Sea Salt Learning. My work explores the context of the Social Age and the intersection of formal and social systems.
This entry was posted in Community and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to The Futility of Peace

  1. Pingback: Peace: Dialogue | Julian Stodd's Learning Blog

  2. Pingback: Our Shared Differences | Julian Stodd's Learning Blog

  3. Pingback: Social Leadership: Citizenship | Julian Stodd's Learning Blog

  4. Pingback: Engaging Power [2]: Gangs | Julian Stodd's Learning Blog

  5. Pingback: Engaging Power [4]: Diffusion | Julian Stodd's Learning Blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.