Hello World
I’m using my daily thoughts and encounters to discover as many things as possible which bring together, rather than divide, our various belief systems and cultures.
One thing I have yet to attempt in any of these posts is to ‘follow on’ from the preceding one. Today the subject of peace found me doing just that. A friend mentioned that the psychological basis for Trust Me, which I mentioned last time, was similar to the Prisoner’s Dilemma. I shan’t explain the mechanics of the Prisoner’s Dilemma here – its philosophy is fully discussed on many information sites – but in talking about peace, it is evident that the Prisoner’s Dilemma applies to politics as well.
Take the ‘nuclear deterrent’, for instance. Governments choose whether to arm or not. Arming costs their country billions of whatever their currency is, but they have the upper hand over any rival countries that don’t arm. If both countries arm, they have no advantage over each other. Neither do they have any more power than each other if both choose not to arm – but they both spend much less money.
What if everyone applied the same principle to every situation one might encounter, from individual personal life through to international affairs? And why will that never happen? Is our world really full of people who want to fight all the time? What should an enlightened society do about them?
In a satirical essay at school many years back I wrote that hooliganism should be made a sport, and proceeded to design one which, based on its own intrinsic violence and general lack of rules, would solve the problem of hooliganism by destroying itself. I can imagine many people thinking that might not be a bad idea, and that it could be extended to include many different types of violent criminal.
However, although such an extreme measure – not to mention other extreme measures some societies already take against crime – would solve the problem for the rest of us, we would have failed those who needed help the most. How do we help them? With a representative, perhaps? A representative for peace?
Here lies both the problem and the solution. No one person stands, elected or otherwise, as the world’s figurehead for peace. Yes indeed, many try, and some succeed once or twice, winning historical recognition and Nobel prizes, etc. But it is a task too long for one person’s lifetime. Whom then to turn to?
I can now visualize the many of you who are not Christians rolling their eyes in anticipation of my mentioning Jesus. But hold on – think about it for a few minutes, if you would do me a favour. How many of you honestly do not believe Jesus ever existed? It doesn’t matter whether you believe Him to be the Son of God or not. It would take, ironically, an extraordinary leap of faith to state categorically that there was never any such person. Other religious teachings even acknowledge his existence. He is, for example, a key figure in the Qu’ran, and that is something I may explore a little further in future.
For now, however, we need a Prince of Peace. I shan’t tell you all to read the Bible, or believe in anything you can’t believe in. But if you would, bear these facts in mind: Jesus said, “What comes out of you is what makes you ‘unclean’ ... evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance”. He taught and stood against all these sins. And later, one of St Paul’s letters asserts that the fruit of the (Holy) Spirit is, “love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness”.
One or two in the first list are all too familiar to me, but thankfully so are some in the second. That’s all we need to know to change the world for the better. I’m not asking you all to convert. Just take those quotes to heart and apply them. And if just one person does so, the lives they touch will all be made a little happier.
Thanks for listening – and take care.
