Informal Objective Summaries Buddha, Penn, Emerson, Addams, Weil - Essay Example

Informal Objective Summaries Informal Objective Summaries According to Emerson, the question of peace has always been in the public mind. Individuals in the society who considered peace to be virtuous experienced life in a positive way. Peace ensures that people live without problems that could arise when people are in uproar. He also states that those individuals who took on peace co-existed well with other members in the society as they witnessed minimal objections. Peace brings people together because of mutual agreements within the society.

William Penn goes on to argue that peace is brought about by justice. When justice is provided for all people in the society, the possibility of people fighting against one another diminishes. Justice has been widely used in our society to promote peace. This is as observed in the way Embassies prevent war through the airing of views and pleas from the wronged parties. Buddha states that peace cannot be achieved absence of love. He continues to say that the only solution to hatred is love. This is because the only way to overcome evil which is the root of all that is all that is considered bad or wrong is only through love alone.

William Penn’s argument is from a religious perspective hence he incorporates culture in his argument. Majority of the cultures have an established religion, owing to this fact Penn uses Christianity to bring across the message of peace. This is evident from the way he states that the Savior came to save lives but not to destroy them and in the long run promote and induce peace among men (Penn, 1983). According to Jane Addams, peace brings about the promise of a brighter future. This is in the sense that, with peaceful coexistence, there will be no more wars.

Wars are among the major causes of present and future problems in the society. As a result, natural resource depletion will come to an end and no more loss of human lives in the name of war. During wars, many people lose their lives and many resources are wasted, as a result. After the wars, many resources are used to rebuild the things that have been destroyed by the wars. People in the society will hence get a chance to enjoy the fruits of their labor, as personal efforts will be geared towards self-development.

Jane also insists on the on the improvement of relations between people. Through the implementation of justice, governments address the issues of poverty and disease among their citizens. In so doing, the government takes care of the lives of the elite and disadvantaged members in the society. She also continued to state that peace could become a reality if only men refrained from gains that resulted to oppression of individuals. Peace could be achieved through addressing the cause or issues of the poor.

Jane did not perceive peace as the nonexistence of war but the efforts put forth to better human life. Thus, as a result, peace made war improbable and hence it became a necessity in the society. This is evident in the International Peace Conference held in 1904. From the above facts, it possible that Jane Addams took a theological approach in bringing forth her ideals for peace (Addams, 1907). Pacifism is an act whereby parties in conflict with each other result not to indulge in war or violent actions.

Many are the times when the parties involved decide not to harm themselves, something that could result to war or violence. Non- violence is the abstinence from violent behavior such as war. It is evident that pacifism and non-violence have some sort of similarity but the differences outweigh the similarities. Pacifism involves the application of personal ethics. An individual must understand his or her own ethical considerations. These ethics are adopted by individuals for a variety of reasons that determine the character of the individual.

On the other hand, non-violence is a choice made consciously to stray from violence though it may seem as a viable option at the time. Decisions made as a result of pacifism are considered weak owing to the fact that that higher priority is placed on moral vanity. Hence, very little consideration is placed in making the correct choices because they may result in violence. Activists who are non-violent in nature make decisions based on strength and justice of the matter at hand, whereas pacifists make decisions blindly as they adhere to ideals that revolve around morality.

Because of this, non-violence is preferred to pacifism. References Addams, J. (1907). Newer Ideals of Peace. New York: The Macmillan Company Penn, W. (1983). An Essay towards the Present & Future Peace in Europe: By the Establishment of a European Dyet, Parliament, or Estates. New York: Georg Olms Verlag