tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post2215879928042868916..comments2024-03-15T01:34:45.154-07:00Comments on Chiron: Peace and RehabilitationRoryhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08483616030072739190noreply@blogger.comBlogger36125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-36544350531629564712011-11-07T00:16:54.471-08:002011-11-07T00:16:54.471-08:00Point taken.Point taken.Josh Kruschkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09288700371539530398noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-52141879531623010462011-11-06T20:14:56.121-08:002011-11-06T20:14:56.121-08:00*Note I'm not saying the words of the definiti...*Note I'm not saying the words of the definition need to include the negative implications but rather that the negative IDEA has to be contained with in the definition and therefore defining in terms of a 'lack' or, more commonly, 'opposite' is perfectly valid as a linguistic toolTravishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15353783271100674218noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-37362212134290947492011-11-06T20:12:42.715-08:002011-11-06T20:12:42.715-08:00First, I don't think the 'state of mind...First, I don't think the 'state of mind' definition for 'peace' makes any sense in the current context.<br /><br />"Only bad definitions are circular."<br /><br /> On the surface, sure but go further. Define "Big"? How are you going to do it with out expressing a contradictory idea or, eventually ending up back at some pre-existing concept of what is 'big'. Sure you can list a bunch of synonyms but is that really a definition? Somewhere the *idea* has to already exist in your head. Then it's an exercise of matching, 'oh, this word means that idea'. But that doesn't define something for someone witout the frame of reference and eventually you end up back at 'big is big'.<br /><br />This seems silly because we all have tacitly agreed upon basic word meanings already but go try and explain how to find the area of a circle to a 3 year old. Without that 3 year old knowing (or learning) a number of ideas which we take for granted it is going to be a pretty hard task.<br /><br />"Defining something by what it 'is' is finite. "<br /><br />Doesn't that contain an inherent implication of what it isn't as well? And isn't that therefore, by your argument, also infinite?<br /><br />No, seriously, how can a definition *NOT* cover what something isn't? When you define 'car' you need to distinguish from 'go-kart', 'dump-truck' and 'Sherman tank' right?Travishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15353783271100674218noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-82153805907466819122011-11-06T09:46:35.998-08:002011-11-06T09:46:35.998-08:00Travis -
Defining something by what it is not can...Travis -<br /><br />Defining something by what it is not can go on forever. <br /><br />Defining something by what it 'is' is finite. <br /><br />Only bad definitions are circular.<br /><br />Telling me what something is not, doesn't tell me what it is.<br /><br />When you type the word 'Peace' are we talking a state of mind or lack of conflict which is an action. And one doesn't necessarily lead or cause or represent the other. <br /><br />Also, peoples understand of are language is individualistic, to some degree. <br /><br />Hmmmm.....Josh Kruschkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09288700371539530398noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-47882253043576087622011-11-06T06:50:37.842-08:002011-11-06T06:50:37.842-08:00Josh- my comment wasn't really about peace and...Josh- my comment wasn't really about peace and violence- it's about the nature definitions. If people insist on following a definition far enough every definition becomes either circular or a study in opposites. At some point define 'this' we have to accept that we know what 'that' is.Travishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15353783271100674218noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-39342528983448515482011-11-04T18:17:03.874-07:002011-11-04T18:17:03.874-07:00If we are defining things by opposites then maybe ...If we are defining things by opposites then maybe a better opposit for peace would be turmoil?<br /><br />Violence is a action taken from a desision made, and is made against someone.<br /><br />Hmmmm....Josh Kruschkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09288700371539530398noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-29141047566599071272011-11-04T17:20:42.472-07:002011-11-04T17:20:42.472-07:00Annon 2 -
The Questions were not for Rory, but f...Annon 2 - <br /><br />The Questions were not for Rory, but for Travis<br />to think on and answer for himself.<br /><br />Rory, this why I usualy name the person I'm asking a question of, even if they take it as a personal attack on self. Less confusion that way.<br /><br />Maybe we needed to define or come up with a common definition of conflict, war and violence before we can have a meaningful discussion on "peace?"<br /><br />Hmmm....Josh Kruschkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09288700371539530398noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-6583511158122231802011-11-04T16:43:26.368-07:002011-11-04T16:43:26.368-07:00Anon2 here again.
To Josh K.: Please examine Rory...Anon2 here again.<br />To Josh K.: Please examine Rory's third paragraph where he <br />says: "...depending on how you define it, the absence of war or violence or conflict." If someone is being bullied, he has a conflict as you yourself have stated. Therefore, that someone cannot be "at peace".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-51735631240278973002011-11-04T15:38:03.910-07:002011-11-04T15:38:03.910-07:00Why do people continue to define peace as the abse...Why do people continue to define peace as the absents of violence?<br /><br />Is someone that is being bullied at "peace" if they don't resort to violene to resolve the conflict? <br /><br />Violene is just a tool, maybe the ultimate tool or most permanent tool, we have at our disposal to end conflict.<br /><br />Hmmm......<br /><br /><i>It is better to be violent, if there is violence in our hearts, than to put on the cloak of nonviolence to cover impotence."</i><br />- Mahatma Gandhi<br />Indian political and spiritual leader (1869 - 1948)<br />http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/2742.htmlJosh Kruschkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09288700371539530398noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-10381913897322051472011-11-04T11:07:15.490-07:002011-11-04T11:07:15.490-07:00Anon 1-
In a bit of a rush so I hope I'm not...Anon 1- <br /><br />In a bit of a rush so I hope I'm not too short with your arguments- I respect that there is some serious thought there and ideas worth considering but think you are reading too much into this 'definition' thing (a relative rarity, most people are not concerned enough with proper definitions). At some point any term has to be defined by it's opposite. If I say something is 'big' ultimately our understanding of it relies on knowing that it is 'not small' (regardlessnof the actual words chosen we need to the concept).<br /><br />The reason why 'peace' is defined as the absence of violence is because it is a discussion on how to get peace; it's simply the starting place of this particular discussion.Travishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15353783271100674218noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-70588985372979705332011-11-03T12:58:40.638-07:002011-11-03T12:58:40.638-07:00Anon1 here again.
Rory wrote: I have a rule of th...Anon1 here again.<br /><br />Rory wrote: I have a rule of thumb-- "If you won't define your terms, you're trying to con me. If you can't define your terms you're conning yourself."<br /><br />OK - Peace is the context in which the growth of relationship, culture, and civilization can occur. <br /><br />That definition isn't static, and it goes back as far as Thucydides, who observed that Sparta was displaced by Athens because they didn't do their job creating peace. Power comes with obligations, he wrote - the biggest of which is providing a context for the growth of something other than violence. He was no pussy, or wide-eyed idealist.<br /><br />It's the same thinking that underlies the thinking of such reprobate peaceniks as Machiaveilli, and Carl von Clausewitz. Both of whom are still taught at Westpoint.<br /><br />For all three, peace isn't the *absence* of war; it's something *other* than war. Clausewits famously said that "war was the extension of politics by other means" ... but even for him violence wasn't the only real thing. It was one of the tools you used to achieve a "real" thing.<br /><br />Part of what disturbs me about your notion that peace is simply the absence of violence ... is that it means that violence is the *only* "real" thing. That not only is violence/peace binary, but that violence is the #1, and peace the #0. <br /><br />Why? Why not the other way round? Even if things are binary (and I don't think they are), couldn't violence as logically be the void when peace is absent? Why is violence primary?<br /><br />I suspect you'd say because you know violence is "real." You've experienced it. <br /><br />I've got huge respect for your understanding of violent behaviour and dynamics - it's why I found and read your blog. And living with the "reality" of violence is what gives so much authority to what you write. You've rejected the fantasy that many others describe as violence, honing in on what *is*, instead.<br /><br />I value such a "reality" based view. I value reality enough that I'll still dispute that violence is the *only* thing that's real. To me ... that doesn't jive with reality.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-46852043712212623692011-11-03T07:20:51.464-07:002011-11-03T07:20:51.464-07:00Yeah, you're right that if I follow what I sai...Yeah, you're right that if I follow what I said all the way through it leaves out a lot of stuff. Was being too reductionist.<br /><br />Do you think though that there are states of affairs -- call it "peace" or what you will -- that are stable situations worth working towards? If there are, what are some of the more important elements?Joshhttp://joshhaas.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-51802575044814846382011-11-02T21:36:19.711-07:002011-11-02T21:36:19.711-07:00"In peace prepare for war, in war prepare for...<i>"In peace prepare for war, in war prepare for peace."</i> - Sun Tzu<br /><br />To me peace is the state you are in when not in conflict. It is not a good thing or bad thing its just a state of being.<br /><br />Just as much evil has been committed in the name of peace as was ever committed in war.<br /><br />JoshJosh Kruschkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09288700371539530398noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-19030101871846371512011-11-02T14:42:23.105-07:002011-11-02T14:42:23.105-07:00Anon2- Definitely. Defining terms should be the f...Anon2- Definitely. Defining terms should be the first thing... <br /><br />which gets to the 'undefined' and implicit definitions of Josh and Anon 1. I have a rule of thumb-- "If you <b>won't</b> define your terms, you're trying to con me. If you <b>can't</b> define your terms you're conning yourself."<br /><br />Seriously, Josh, if your thesis holds then peacefulness would be directly correlated with affluence, the rich would never kill or wage war... there's way more going on than that.<br /><br />Terry- I'm so sorry I couldn't make it. I hope you had the best day ever and just the first of many, brother.Roryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08483616030072739190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-502562000127735702011-11-02T08:40:53.208-07:002011-11-02T08:40:53.208-07:00Second Anonymous here again. Sure enough, the sem...Second Anonymous here again. Sure enough, the semantics and fuzzy meanings make for a messy discussion. We end up with the “Peace that passeth all understanding” because of ambiguity and vagueness. Which one is the Peace Panel going to cover?<br /><br />Peace defined by the Webster 7th Collegiate Dictionary: <br />1. “a state of tranquility or quiet: <br />a. “freedom from civil disturbance”<br />b. “a state of security or order within a community provided for by law or custom”<br />2. “freedom from disquieting or oppressive thoughts or emotions’ (inner peace)<br />3. “harmony in personal relations”<br />4. a: “state or period of mutual concord between governments” <br />b: “a pact or agreement to end hostilities between those who have been at war”<br /><br /><br />To Anonymous 1: Peace is not “static”? Really? “Rest in Peace” is found all through cemeteries on tombstones. Definition of Static: “2. of or relating to bodies at rest or forces in equilibrium”.<br />The truth be told, children in the United States are showing less respect for the elderly, less respect for their teachers, less respect for policemen and less respect for their own parents. The prison population is only a part of this cultural breakdown.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-40666304199744893282011-11-01T12:43:01.769-07:002011-11-01T12:43:01.769-07:00Don't Shoot: One Man, A Street Fellowship, and...Don't Shoot: One Man, A Street Fellowship, and the End of Violence in Inner-City America<br /><br />Just heard about this book on the radio. Seems apropos to this post and quite possibly a good read.<br /><br />http://www.amazon.com/Dont-Shoot-Fellowship-Violence-Inner-City/dp/1608192644malcolmhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04582605554214138932noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-89597077515347486322011-11-01T10:24:16.128-07:002011-11-01T10:24:16.128-07:00Re: defining peace as more than an absence, I thin...Re: defining peace as more than an absence, I think your post itself gives a very good implicit definition. A peaceful community is one where its members have (and believe they have) effective ways of pursuing their goals that don't involve violence (for instance, commerce, entrepreneurship, mutual aid and cooperatives, etc.)<br /><br />So "peace in the middle east" for instance means creating a cultural and socioeconomic state of affairs where Palestinians believe they can feed their families and have happy lives without killing Israelis and Israelis believe they can go about their daily lives safely without being surrounded by an army. Not an easy goal, but I think it's a relatively concrete goal.<br /><br />So to your point about activists, saying "war is bad" is probably less effective than getting out there and building the various flavors of social institutions that create peaceful societies.<br /><br />(Fantastic post, btw... been reading your blog for a while as a listener, I think it's really great).Joshhttp://joshhaas.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-35304500835058959682011-11-01T10:04:18.447-07:002011-11-01T10:04:18.447-07:00I don't have any deep thoughts, but I've b...I don't have any deep thoughts, but I've been turning this over in my mind since yesterday and it occurs to me that this is a major source of police/public friction.<br /><br />The cop does what he does because he lives in a world where doing that is necessary to survive. He may refuse to shake hands, be overly gruff, order hands removed from pockets, disbelieve truthful excuses ("I just forgot to pay for it!"), and demand that someone hang up a cell phone, etc. etc. He does all sorts of things that are shockingly rude to "nice, normal" people, because he spends so much time dealing with non-nice, non-normal people, for whom politeness and trust are weakness.<br /><br />So, off-topic, but I wonder if there isn't some way to improve police-community relations with that knowledge.Rob Lymannoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-42217832143641905022011-11-01T07:13:00.939-07:002011-11-01T07:13:00.939-07:00Karrde,
That was one of my life changing events. M...Karrde,<br />That was one of my life changing events. Meeting a dangerous, old man who is honorable and taught me what I wasn't trying to learn.Terryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05996497355954162436noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-57971702540586019312011-11-01T07:05:59.718-07:002011-11-01T07:05:59.718-07:00I think that kids need to see people who are tough...<i>I think that kids need to see people who are tougher, smarter AND more successful while being honorable. And they have to see that happiness. Some of these kids have no role model for that.</i><br /><br />Rory: your comments remind me of something I read many years ago, on another blog. (Took a moment to find...the blogger is Grim, posting <a href="http://grimbeorn.blogspot.com/2004/06/social-harmony.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>. I think it's his most popular post, even though it is now more than 7 years old.)<br /><br />The genesis for his train of thought was discussion of an old sensei opening a martial-arts studio. A reporter asked the sensei if martial arts was "all about fighting." <br /><br />The sensei replied, "No, it is about social harmony."<br /><br />That statement developed a train of thought about the difference between protective violence and predatory violence, and the respect that young people have for old people.<br /><br />One problem for social harmony is the fact that the average young men has little fear for the physical prowess of older men. <br /><br />An older man (sensei, Policeman, Drill Instructor...or <i>caporegime</i>, gang leader, hardened thug) who has the ability to overpower a young man also has the ability to train the young man. He can turn the young man into a copy of himself.<br /><br />The big distinction I took away from that article was the distinction between <b>predatory</b> and <b>protective</b>. Both have the capability of violence.<br /><br />But I also remembered the difference between a powerful young man and a dangerous old man.karrdehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00205160745963596856noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-54192761151200401272011-11-01T06:32:46.127-07:002011-11-01T06:32:46.127-07:00Wow, deep post. I do see a glaring point missing f...Wow, deep post. I do see a glaring point missing from the conversation, the criminals view.<br />As a criminal,I kept doing criminal acts until it didn't get me what I wanted anymore. Police like to say rehab doesn't work (in general), and in general they are right. The reason? You cannot rehab someone in a place they need the skill set you are trying to get rid of to survive everyday. I am constantly amazed that this point is so easily overlooked by "smart" people trying to "solve" this problem. Plus, the kind of socialization and training a child growing into a criminal goes through is deep and early. It takes a major life event to short circuit it enough to make a change possible.<br />On a different note, peace and violence are not the same, but they are different sides of the same coin. Neither one will ever go away. One will be dominant until the other is needed, as it has been through history.<br />I want to keep writing, but I need to go get married today.<br />Just a different point of view.Terryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05996497355954162436noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-81413357436547075752011-10-31T21:17:34.194-07:002011-10-31T21:17:34.194-07:00Peace is consistency and comfort. If there is lit...Peace is consistency and comfort. If there is little change in a person's daily routines, then the consistency rule is followed. If the person feels (mostly) comfortable, then this rule is followed. <br /><br />A homeless drunk, a serial killer, a mother of 6, a lumber jack, a (shudder) peace activist (a term that doesn't fit the rules), a cop - as long as they feel comfortable, they will not change; as long as their actions have consistent consequences, they will not change.<br /><br />The necessary component for change is catastrophe, the third 'dark' component of peace.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-36711133744651041802011-10-31T18:17:57.704-07:002011-10-31T18:17:57.704-07:00A definition of peace which doesn't simply equ...A definition of peace which doesn't simply equate to an absence of conflict?<br /><br />Hmmm. <br /><br />I think that conceptions too binary. Peace, if it's real peace, builds something positive. It provides a context for growth. The simple absence of active violence isn't necessarily peace - it could as easily be an armed and uneasy truce. <br /><br />Peace is no more static than any other kind of growth - a tree is only static when it's dead. <br /><br />As martial artists, we often tell ourselves that we learn a violent art because we want the capacity to protect something, someone. Our life, someone else's. A set of ideas we find valuable. Or paradoxically, Peace. Those things we want to protect are intrinsically valuable ... they're not the absence of something else. A void, named only as the opposite of a thing with *actual* reality.<br /><br />You've experienced peace, just as you've experienced violence. And you know that one - either one - isn't simply the absence of the other. Just as you know that love isn't the absence of hate.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-87902119719222452682011-10-31T15:47:29.487-07:002011-10-31T15:47:29.487-07:00Preacherman (Nigel?) Thanks. I get working for id...Preacherman (Nigel?) Thanks. I get working for ideals. Less positive with squishy ideals and when wishing is substituted for working...<br /><br />Maija- absolutely respect your refusal to look at it as a one dimensional problem. It isn't.<br /><br />Jim- Long talk over a beer. Does the definition of criminal behavior change between cultures? Is the cultural line always where the official line is? Do kids become criminals in one area because they have learned a particular definition of success and in another area are rebelling because they know it is safe?<br /><br />Scott- And the hard part is having people from the pro-social culture who can recognize which skills are useful in both.<br /><br />Anon1- Can you give me or point to this definition of peace that doesn't center around an absence of conflict?<br /><br />Kai- Absolutely. I think that kids need to see people who are tougher, smarter AND more successful while being honorable. And they have to see that happiness. Some of these kids have no role model for that.<br /><br />Anon2- Not sure what problem you are referring to, in your first para. It's not being on the panel. <br />Of course crime-fighting is an ideal. Do you believe for a second that any politician who pushes it has a vague idea of the nuts and bolts of what it would entail? And Law (Rule of Law), especially capitalized, is one of the original noble ideals... but it is an ideal. <br />Last, no one except you appears to be thinking in terms of protected ecosystems. To put it another way, 'When idealists try to rehabilitate it is a lot like teaching a grizzly to dance.The grizzly won't do it because it doesn't serve the grizzly."<br /><br />Jim- I don't see people raised in the lifestyle who are much affected by jail time. Near-death, death of a running buddy and having a daughter appear to be the three most powerful motivators, IME.<br /><br />The rest, Thanks.Roryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08483616030072739190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14473417.post-4684229538469904202011-10-31T14:12:26.861-07:002011-10-31T14:12:26.861-07:00An interestingly timed article from Yahoo: http:/...An interestingly timed article from Yahoo: http://news.yahoo.com/reformed-skinhead-endures-agony-remove-tattoos-162205881.html<br /><br />It tells how one of the biggest names in the white supremacist movement reformed, and what he went through to get his tattoos removed.<br /><br />Now, I'll admit that I'm personally kind of skeptical about real change in this type of case. It's kind of like religious conversion... It's not too often you find somebody truly making a dramatic conversion that's 180 degrees from where they were. But it can happen... Maybe it's my professional background coming through -- but one part of me wonders just what motivated him. As Rory said -- criminals aren't generally "broken people." They're people adapted to a particular environment and society, just like most of us. But that's adaptation that goes on very early in life -- and it doesn't change easily. The general rule of thumb that I've come across in studies and in experience is that most people who will reform will do so after their first significant encounter with law enforcement. (Note that the definition of significant can vary person to person; a cop taking the kid home to parents may be enough in one case, while others need to actually be locked up for a night or two.) Of those that don't reform, a portion of them will when caught a second time. If they go to the third? They're going to stay crooks. It's part of how they respond to the world.Jimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15393212692342514984noreply@blogger.com