Bill Kirchen "Catch You On the Flip Flop" Live at Retrofret Guitars

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGtuSWeX8-g

:up:
Following on from https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/576577

Peter Duggan's Artoons - How Manet got his Monet's worth.

Peter Duggan wonders if a chance encounter with the outdoorsy Monet provoked Édouard Manet into creating his famous painting The Luncheon On the Grass,

https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/cartoon/2013/feb/06/peter-duggan-artoon-manet-monet#

Did you enter a story? — 180 Proof

No. But I have found all of this so inspiring...I might...one day...
See https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/574971

I entered a story in the contest and you will have to guess the one I wrote which, oddly enough, you (partly) inspired. Btw, that's meant as nothing less than flattery despite the uncertain quality of my efforts. :smirk: — 180 Proof

Lost for words. I am already trying to guess who wrote what - but never in a million years did I think I would inspire someone, even partly.
Wow... and for you to come out and say that...goodness, what will people think...
Like we care :smile:
Thanks :hearts:

The ethics class should be prepared as a gift. — javi2541997

You might like this cartoon:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/574421

Latest in English Education System:

£4m scheme will form part of government effort to counter subject’s reputation as elitist.
According to a British Council survey, Latin is taught at key stage three in less than 3% of state schools, compared with 49% of independent schools.

The education secretary, Gavin Williamson, said: “We know Latin has a reputation as an elitist subject which is only reserved for the privileged few. But the subject can bring so many benefits to young people, so I want to put an end to that divide.” — The Guardian: Education

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2021/jul/31/latin-introduced-40-state-secondaries-england
--------

Ah, the issue of 'class division' and the benefits of certain subjects to young people.
It made me think of this thread by @javi2541997 which discusses increase violence in the young.
Causes and solutions.
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/11504/consideration-and-reciprocity-as-an-objects-to-avoid-violence-in-our-modern-era/p1

We have to develop a better educational system and teach how bad the violence is. I feel we are living in an Era where people literally do not care about harm others. For this reason, it is time to focus on Ethics and provide more empathy along our relationships.

And my response which looked at role of school exclusions and covid restrictions:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/574024

The suggestion by @javi2541997

The ethics class should be prepared as a gift.

--------

So, I kinda :smirk: when I saw this cartoon and read the BTL comments:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/picture/2021/aug/01/ben-jennings-on-latin-and-vaccines-cartoon

Marcus Aurelius spent a good part of his reign as Emperor at war, and died in his military headquarters in Pannonia (now Serbia). The Empire also saw famine and plague while he was Emperor. I'm amazed he found time to write his Meditations--but know of nothing he wrote specifically addressing war. I suspect his attitude toward it was that war was evil, but a necessary evil to sustain the Empire. — Ciceronianus the White

[ emphasis added * ]

I had meant to say Thanks for this.
I have read his Meditations and likewise wondered how he found the time.
But this was a case of making time. As a way to help order and clarify his thoughts.
A necessary daily practice to cope with all the vicissitudes and responsibilities.
Like having to make war as a necessary evil.

* I had thought of looking up the index, but I take your word for it :smile:

1. 'Dreams' - The Corrs
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=8BglEyv5O2Y

2. Holst: The Planets. Performance on BBC4, each movement introduced by Professor Brian Cox. Amazing background photographs.

I disagree with your point that most of the people know how outrageous violence is. I feel like literally the young people love this issue. — javi2541997

OK. You don't think that young people know very well that violence is 'outrageous' ?
Really ?
When it is perpetrated against them in different ways ? School bullying, being ridiculed and physically attacked is just one of many instances they can experience it. The media is full of it. You think you are alone in seeing this - that you are somehow exceptional ?

As to being violent themselves - they don't necessarily 'love' it. They might even hate that they are involved in it. Being part of a gang so as to fit in and not be attacked.
It takes resources to end this. To improve unfair conditions.

Also, it can be a reaction to the various abuses suffered or frustration against the systems they are embedded in. Family, society, politics, economics; a sense of powerlessness and lack of freedom...the list goes on.

They are most of the time making riots and not respecting the authority at all... — javi2541997

Anger is the issue. It may not manifest in riots but it is understandable, if not condoned, if they don't respect certain 'authority figures' and rebel. It is the only way their/our voices can be heard if politicians don't listen. But protests are now being criminalised * - anything against the government seen as violent and unpatriotic.
What good will prison sentences do ? It is a violence begetting violence.

*https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/apr/19/environment-protest-being-criminalised-around-world-say-experts

In the UK, more than 2,000 people who took part in Extinction Rebellion protests are being taken through the court system in what experts say is one of the biggest crackdowns on protest in British legal history. The scientists also raise concern about efforts to silence climate protests in other parts of the world from the US to France, the Philippines to India. — The Guardian - Environmental activism being criminalised

Rebellion is in the air because the future is at stake.
Outrage caused by outrageous circumstances, local and global.

Most of the people do not care at all. Instead of giving a good image as a young people they only make messes and chaos. — javi2541997

I disagree and think you are wrong to come to such a generalised conclusion.
People care. Even if they sometimes appear not to. All ages are concerned. There is heightened anxiety but also apathy. Cue the Broken Dreams Club:

Thank you so much! I have in mind many weird aspects about "changing the world" but I end up unmotivated due to how drastic and cruel the world can be.
— javi2541997

Cruel? That means you're no longer a dreamer pal! Join the :broken: Dreams Club. — TheMadFool

Certain groups of people who perhaps have more time and energy can shake us all out of complacency.
Also, they are armed with knowledge...from scientists.

The experts warn that just months before a crucial global climate conference due to be held in Glasgow later this year, it is more important than ever that these groups are able to put pressure on politicians and highlight the role polluting corporations are playing in the escalating ecological crisis.

The letter states: “It has become abundantly clear that governments don’t act on climate without pressure from civil society: threatening and silencing activists thus seems to be a new form of anti-democratic refusal to act on climate … [we] therefore urge all governments, courts and legislative bodies around the world to halt and reverse attempts to criminalise nonviolent climate protest.” — The Guardian

I recently debated with Amity how important is to bring up on the table the serious issue of how violent our society is becoming. There are a lot of sad news about riots and fights where turns out the people involved are young (between 17 or 24 years old. For example: Luiz case Spain. — javi2541997

Yes, the discussion started here:

I know this thread is old but it is so necessary to put it on the table. It is crazy how the violence increased drastically in the recent years. A group of teenagers killed another citizen of 24 years old just for a simple discussion. Also a group of Dutch citizens murdered another one from their country just because was “fun” getting involved in a riot or fighting against strangers. — javi2541997

I feel we are living in an Era where people literally do not care about harm others.
— javi2541997

I know its very popular to think so but what evidence do you have that society is more violent or dangerous and getting more so? — Tom Storm

To focus on a specific group - there does seem to be evidence of a spike in teen killings.
Before we can even think about solutions to a problem, the causes need to be identified.

One of the main goals should be teach to kids how outrageous is the violence and how important is respect other people’s lives and integrity. — javi2541997

I think both children and adults know exactly how outrageous violence is. Victims and perpetrators alike.
When it comes to gangs involved in e.g. drug feuds and targeting pupils out of school, then the question is how to reach them and change behaviour. Why do gangs exist ?
This is not a new phenomenon - here's a history of Glasgow gangs:
It starts with a black and white photo of 'A gang fight on Tollcross Road, Parkhead in 1933'
https://www.glasgowlive.co.uk/news/history/history-glasgows-street-gangs-tongs-12252432

Recently:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/aug/01/police-review-teen-killings-in-search-of-catalyst-for-spike-in-murders

Measures are being introduced to try to identify what is driving rising murder rates in the wake of a spike in teenage deaths in some of the UK’s homicide hotspots...
The development comes during a sharp rise in teenage murders and as concern grows that feuds aggravated by Covid lockdowns and months out of education will play out over the summer. Sources from the mayor of London’s violence reduction unit (VRU), which is coordinating the capital’s homicide reviews, say that by examining the murders of older teenagers and by involving children’s services they hope to understand why young people are increasingly drawn into violence...

Police intelligence confirms that gangs have targeted pupils out of school for disciplinary reasons or because of coronavirus restrictions – more than one million children in England were out of school in a single week last month for Covid-19-related reasons – a record absence rate...

Murder rates in London are now broadly in line with last year’s total of 127 murders; what is causing fresh concern is the proportion of teenage homicides, which has increased from a quarter of that total to around a third. So far, 22 teenagers have been killed in the capital this year compared with 14 in the whole of 2020. The youngest is 14-year-old Fares Maatou who died in April after being attacked in east London.

More widely, the data appears to continue trends observed last year when the number of homicide victims aged between 16 and 24 rose to 142 across the country in the 12 months to March 2020 – an increase of 32 on the previous year...

Harding said that pre-existing levels of violence caused by alcohol and drug consumption were compounded in regions such as south Wales by the latest development in the violent drugs business model – county lines.
Instead of gangs sending individuals to, say, Cardiff from Manchester, Harding said, they were now recruiting local dealers into their ranks, a development that was causing fresh tensions and violence. — Police review teen killings in search of catalyst for spike in murders

I only want to improve our educational system with the goal of avoiding violence — javi2541997

It will take more than that. Perhaps by looking at why the education system itself fails pupils.
Using punishment measures including exclusions and isolation booths for bad behaviour.

Exclusions are not a punishment or a deterrent: they’re a day off school.

Excluding pupils for a long period of time means they miss valuable teaching time and are immediately put at a disadvantage. — tes.com: a student take on why exclusions don't work

Punishment is violence in more ways than one. It's a 'vicious' circle.
So, how to turn the system into a 'virtuous' cycle ?
I doubt it can be done by teaching ethics. Depending.
Perhaps the teaching method counts as much as the content...geared to the needs/wants of the pupils.
Start with careful listening with respect for the individual rather than preaching or punishing.
Show rather than tell...

That's only the beginning. There is a widespread problem.
Psychopathic elites in power acting as role models.
Using derogatory and hate language and creating divisions. Reduction of services etc., etc.

:hearts:

'We Shall Overcome' - Joan Baez (BBC Television Theatre, London - June 5, 1965)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nM39QUiAsoM

I don't believe in any of the lyrics.

"We Shall Overcome"

We shall overcome,
We shall overcome,
We shall overcome, some day.

Oh, deep in my heart,
I do believe
We shall overcome, some day.

We'll walk hand in hand,
We'll walk hand in hand,
We'll walk hand in hand, some day.

Oh, deep in my heart,

We shall live in peace,
We shall live in peace,
We shall live in peace, some day.

Oh, deep in my heart,

We shall all be free,
We shall all be free,
We shall all be free, some day.

Oh, deep in my heart,

We are not afraid,
We are not afraid,
We are not afraid, TODAY

Oh, deep in my heart,

We shall overcome,
We shall overcome,
We shall overcome, some day.

Oh, deep in my heart,
I do believe
We shall overcome, some day.

Civil Rights Movement
'We Shall Overcome' - Pete Seeger ( with lyrics )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhnPVP23rzo

Asylum seekers
You Won’t Believe What Happens When These 17 People Meet
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCbACC-lskU

Emotional and stirring. But I don't believe in any of the lyrics.

"We Shall Overcome"

We shall overcome,
We shall overcome,
We shall overcome, some day.

Oh, deep in my heart,
I do believe
We shall overcome, some day.

We'll walk hand in hand,
We'll walk hand in hand,
We'll walk hand in hand, some day.

Oh, deep in my heart,

We shall live in peace,
We shall live in peace,
We shall live in peace, some day.

Oh, deep in my heart,

We shall all be free,
We shall all be free,
We shall all be free, some day.

Oh, deep in my heart,

We are not afraid,
We are not afraid,
We are not afraid, TODAY

Oh, deep in my heart,

We shall overcome,
We shall overcome,
We shall overcome, some day.

Oh, deep in my heart,
I do believe
We shall overcome, some day.

Thanks for clarifying with such a substantive and thought-provoking response.
So many points to discuss but, right now, I'd like to focus on:

They turned from the noble notion that it is glorious to die for one's country to being totally anti-war.
— Amity
And how many in the military are for war? It's like saying that doctors and medics are for disease and accidents. — ssu

A question I raised in the OP:

Many politicians and the medical profession still use war vocabulary to further their agendas or projects.
Should we be changing the way we approach such issues - having a 'War Cabinet' about Brexit or a 'War on Cancer' ? — Amity

So, the analogy is interesting one to consider; there are similarities but also many differences.
Where to start...
How many in the 'military' standing 'for or against' war compared to individual health professionals 'for or against ' disease and accident.
The military:

A military, also known collectively as armed forces, is a heavily armed, highly organized force primarily intended for warfare. It is typically officially authorized and maintained by a sovereign state, with its members identifiable by their distinct military uniform.

...of uncertain etymology, one suggestion being derived from *mil-it- – going in a body or mass.[5][6]
As a noun, the military usually refers generally to a country's armed forces, or sometimes, more specifically, to the senior officers who command them.[4][7] In general, it refers to the physicality of armed forces, their personnel, equipment, and the physical area which they occupy.

As an adjective, military originally referred only to soldiers and soldiering, but it soon broadened to apply to land forces in general, and anything to do with their profession — Wiki: Military

Anyone who signs up for the military know what they are signing up for.
They take an oath. In the US, it includes defending the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic and to obey the the orders of the President.
https://www.thebalancecareers.com/oath-of-enlistment-3354049

Another discussion could be had about who the President might consider a 'domestic enemy'.
Think protest march v riots. Who are the 'patriots' ? Who the traitors ?

So, individuals acting within this 'machine' are not mechanistic robots but include:

...all types of people to act in uniform as an organized group. It's simply a pragmatic issue: the better controlled, coordinated and organized force likely will prevail. — ssu

There is a need to strip away some individual identity. To obey orders without question. The training is tough and designed to harden.

The danger of this lies in taking a dehumanising attitude towards the 'enemy'.
https://www.soldiersforthecause.org/2012/03/21/dehumanization-eliminates-the-guilt/

So the cat is out of the bag… Soldiers kill people. Now what are we going to do about it? And the big one at the moment is the case of Robert Bales. It’s the major issue that has spearheaded this sudden distaste for the ravages of war — the issue of the American soldier that killed 16 civilians in Afghanistan. But what did he do wrong really? We can criticize in our recliners, but few of us have actually been those dogs of war crying havoc... — Dehumanization Eliminates the Guilt

Turning to the health profession - the oath. There are variations and updates of the Hippocratic Oath.
Important aspects:

For Warriner, the original oath still resonates, particularly the phrase: “I will utterly reject harm and mischief,” which is commonly misquoted as “First do no harm.” He says, “For me that fits perfectly with not over diagnosing, not over treating, and sharing decision making.”

He finds the vow, “I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being,” which was included in the 1964 version of the oath, particularly meaningful. “When I teach juniors about how to help patients I remind them these are not blood tests—they are people,” he says. — The BMJ :Is the Hippocratic oath still relevant to practising doctors today ?

So, to return to the analogy, individual health professionals are not 'for' or 'against' disease and accident.
The militaristic or 'war' language is not helpful as this article explains from a nursing perspective:
Framing the pandemic as a war, with battles and sacrifices, sends the wrong messages

https://rcni.com/nursing-standard/opinion/comment/covid-19-why-we-need-to-ditch-military-terms-160071

We call it a ‘fight’, with individual battles and skirmishes and sacrifices to be made, and when lives are lost, we make death an honourable and heroic martyrdom.

That last sentence was difficult to write. I felt awkward writing it and you may feel uncomfortable reading it because as I type these words from the safety of isolation, my colleagues are facing serious risk. Many lives have already been lost.

We all feel heartbroken at the loss of our colleagues but we must not accept that their deaths were necessary or inevitable – this is not a war and it is not what nurses joined the profession for. We should not be expected to give our lives for our work. — Covid 19 - Why we need to ditch the military terms

Therein lies the biggest difference.
Soldiers join up with full knowledge that involvement in killing might result in their death.
That is the greatest sacrifice of all.
They are 'for' war or defence of their country and people in that respect. To that degree.
A highly developed sense of duty. For better or worse...

Enjoy the catharsis .. — 180 Proof

My heart grieves and swells.
Tears.
With gratitude.

Didn't know "yw" was a thing. Just meant "you're welcome". Don't like them much myself — 180 Proof

It's fine. No worries, as they say. In the grand scheme of things an' all that.

I'm watching 'Fury'.

Btw, the 50th anniversary release of a boxset All Things Must Pass is to include a pile of outtakes like the one I posted. — 180 Proof

G2K. FYI, I have the original :smile:

Think I'll pass on the 50th anniversary...will wait for you to post stuff :hearts:

Yw - and all the other acronyms used on here - I hate 'em cos I am not in the know and have to look them up. Damned annoying but there ya' go...

The abbreviation yw is an internet acronym for you’re welcome. Yw also sometimes stands for yeah, whatever and you whitey.

Yw. :smirk:
TU. thx.
George still :cool:

It was just released by GH's estate. — 180 Proof

Guess there will be more coming...

I understand this point but I think we don't need be so necessarily academic. — javi2541997

The point is that these philosophies are not only theoretical can be practical ways of looking at how to live life.

I guess the point is provide to people a good quality in ethics to just develop the basic points of civics. — javi2541997

Ethics is a major part of stoicism.

The virtuous life is free of all passions, which are intrinsically disturbing and harmful to the soul, but includes appropriate emotive responses conditioned by rational understanding and the fulfillment of all one’s personal, social, professional, and civic responsibilities. The Stoics believed that the person who has achieved perfect consistency in the operation of his rational faculties, the “wise man,” is extremely rare, yet serves as a prescriptive ideal for all. The Stoics believed that progress toward this noble goal is both possible and vitally urgent. — IEP article: Stoic Ethics

https://iep.utm.edu/stoiceth/

I even make the mistake of forgetting what is the path of happiness according to my own circumstances.
Whenever I look deeply to myself I get a double dilemma: everybody is wrong or I am wrong because I see the life and the individuals so drastically different from how "supposedly" the world does. — javi2541997

I think it is easy to forget a 'path of happiness' if we don't recognise daily and take every opportunity to consider others who disagree with us, or attack us. We have to get past, rise above or use any first reaction of anger. There are other options other than knee-jerk retaliations, or ignoring...
Actually, they can provide more of a learning and growth opportunity than those who agree with us.
I can easily lose my 'balance' and perspective...when attacked, if I see it as personal.

The provocation and apparent misrepresentations of our words.
The what and who they think we are or stand for; the assumptions we can all make.
If we manage to step back, take a break and breathe...we can question and reflect on how best to respond. Hopefully with a view to clarify meaning and understanding.

What is your philosophy which sees you through ?

I feel the world is sick and the unique vaccine is ethics and a solid educational system. — javi2541997

Well, many think as you do but might differ as to the exact diagnosis; the specific problems and treatment. What would you include as solid subjects to be taught?
What one person desires, another fears. Such is life, no ?

Beautiful. I hadn't heard or seen this version/vision before, thanks :sparkle:

Another new discovery, 'Kaiser Chiefs' after googling Education and War.

Education, Education, Education & War is the fifth studio album by English rock band Kaiser Chiefs... produced by Ben H. Allen III, and is the first Kaiser Chiefs album recorded with new drummer Vijay Mistry. The album's name is partly a reference to a line in a famous 1996 speech by Tony Blair where he emphasised the importance of education, and partly referencing the illegal Iraqi war in which he involved the UK.[2] — Wiki

From the album:
'Coming Home' - Kaiser Chiefs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MPipMQvKgKk

War has this curious way of intoxicating us and our societies. It shows how frighteningly adaptable and malleable we are. Yet that might be also our strength that we do adapt. Because it's usually not that only the so-called anti-social type who prevail in wars, it's how totally ordinary people do fight them. Military men and women are usually the most rational and pragmatic people and furthest from the erratic "artist" type. — ssu

I had a quick look at this - what do you mean by 'the so-called anti-social type' and how do they 'prevail in wars' ? Examples ?

'How totally ordinary people do fight them' - the ordinary as opposed to the military person who fight in wars have been either conscripted or they stay at home, supporting and coping - even with all the traumas involved.
The 'totally ordinary' become out-of-the-ordinary in how they feel and act in such a scenario.
There is a whole spectrum of views and arguments...from strong to weak...how humans are affected.

That includes the military and artistic types. Why would you describe the latter as 'erratic' ?
The conscripts fighting in the trenches included all types.
A lot of what we know about war is from the poets who fought and suffered.
They turned from the noble notion that it is glorious to die for one's country to being totally anti-war. Siegfried Sassoon and Wilfred Owen being the most memorable from WWI.
Other artists changed how we view war. Well, some of us.

His poetry both described the horrors of the trenches and satirised the patriotic pretensions of those who, in Sassoon's view, were responsible for a jingoism-fuelled war.[2] — Wiki

Clearly, military personnel are probably not given to poetic thoughts as they follow out orders. But even if rational and pragmatic, imagination is still required to arrive at creative solutions.
Problems are not just technical in nature with a manual to follow...not so very far from being 'artistic' by using their skills and thinking of 'brotherhood'.

From the standpoint of a Stoic Sage, I think war, if not defensive, would be viewed as motivated by concerns related to acquisition of territory. wealth and power, which are matters regarding which we should be indifferent, and contrary to virtue.

I'm not sure what Dewey felt about war, but suspect that he would feel context must be considered in assessing the appropriateness of judgments, and that as a result it's not possible to to draw absolute conclusions regarding it, if he addressed it as a philosopher. — Ciceronianus the White

Thanks for your response. War motivated by desire as being 'contrary to virtue', therefore seen as a problem ? What about war as motivated by fear, same thing ?

I always have to think about what 'indifference' means. As a reminder:

Indifference exists between good and bad. Stoics claimed that virtues are desirable, while vices should be casted away. Therefore, indifference appears to be the gray area between these two categories. It is important to note that both vices and virtues are within our control, because we can control our mind and will, and therefore we have power over our actions. Things that are indifferent lie completely out of our control, and this is very important to remember for Stoics. In the Enchiridion, Epictetus further explains the difference between the things we can control and the things we cannot. — thewisemind.net

So, desires related to war are those we should be 'indifferent' to. But 'War' itself - and the related issue of 'Fear'; the concepts, experience and function of ?
If war is seen as a problem rather than a solution, how would pragmatists deal with this, as per their decision-making process?
And with regard to education about war and fear, I mentioned stoicism and pragmatism here:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/573670

Grateful for your thoughts.

what we can do to face violence? what are the solutions to make peacefull world?
— Zekkari Mohamed

I know this thread is old but it is so necessary to put it on the table. — javi2541997

Indeed and thanks for reviving it. You are not alone in your concern.

One of the main goals should be teach to kids how outrageous is the violence and how important is respect other people’s lives and integrity. If we do not do so we will continue having a lot of disgraces and probably a WWIII. The language and discourse of the public representatives is bad. Only spread words to make conflicts. It remembers me of the new PM of Perú, Castillo, whose first discourse was attacking Spanish for no reasons or just past issues in conquista. I don’t understand why these politicians want to divide us but we have to learn how to avoid their toxic discourse and share empathy through our relationships. — javi2541997

Re: the specific focus on 'solutions' to violence.

I touched on this in the thread I started:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/11491/war-what-is-the-good-of-war-
There's also this thread: https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/11487/avoiding-war-philosophy-of-peace

So - quite a few perspectives and ways of looking at this.
You make good points re the importance of respect, language and learning. How to be aware of 'toxic discourse' and to 'share empathy through our relationships'. Whatever that means...or entails.

...as long as our rulers educate our children, and we tolerate it, moreover yearn for it. Which is not an education, rather indoctrination.

The sad truth of society, people don't listen to philosophers and arguments, but listen to demagogues and slogans. And if we let this happen once, the most awful people will take advantage of our naivety, and gullibility. — Art Stoic Spirit

I share your view that education is crucial. Thankfully, today we have more access to information and other ways of thinking via the internet. Sharing our experience. Knowledge is power. That, of course, works both ways...

So, to become less gullible and not be swayed by the words of those in power...to help find solutions to problems...needs a process...a learning and decision-making process. All the better to carefully consider and make our choices in life. To act rationally and to cope with emotions.
Which philosophy helps us do this ? Perhaps insights from stoicism or pragmatism...

The moral lesson here, human being should be treated as an individual, not as a member of a group, masses, nation, commune, and so on. Human being is a human being, no more, no less. Should be treated so, not as a expendable unit. — Art Stoic Spirit

And yes, it starts with the individual. The knowing yourself bit...but it seems we can't even agree on what constitutes an 'examined life' :wink:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/11460/what-is-the-examined-life/p1

The sad truth of society, people don't listen to philosophers and arguments... — Art Stoic Spirit

Perhaps not so sad, given all the conflicting and confusing views and arguments ?
We listen to politicians because they are the ones in power and whose voices we hear via media.
How to counteract any sabre-rattling discourse - again we return to education.

Here is one attempt, free to download:
https://eric.ed.gov/?q=war&ff1=autHaas%2c+Mary+E.&ff2=subUnited+States+History&id=ED392707

This paper addresses how fear and hate have had an impact on the ways in which people and nations behave. A study of World War II reveals to people the terrible consequences of fear and hate. After this long war ended, many hoped that the United Nations would put an end to warfare and the acts that had nourished hatred. Using the theme of "Fear and Hate vs. Hope and Cooperation" to study World War II, teachers can address World War II in a meaningful way with children of different ages, abilities, and interests. Suggestions are given for discussion questions, trade books, large and small group activities, and interviewing techniques — Haas, Mary Fear and Hate vs. Hope and Cooperation.Examining an Important Lesson from World War II.

---------

If interested:
Other downloadable texts from Mary Haas from:
https://eric.ed.gov/?q=war&ff1=autHaas%2C+Mary+E.&ff2=subUnited+States+History

This paper is a collection of lessons that examine the many roles that women played in the Vietnam War and the consequences of their experiences for individuals, governments, and military policies. The series begins with an exercise in which students read 16 statements and then try to decide if they apply to U.S. women, Vietnamese women, or both.… — Mary Haas

This document presents lesson plans and related materials for teaching about the role of women in the U.S. military from World War I to Desert Storm (the Gulf War). The lesson includes a table showing the number of women who took part in Desert Storm broken down by branch of service. Another chart shows the number of women who served in the… — Mary Haas

I haven't looked at these yet and they are probably more relevant to the thread I started.
--------

Another educational resource:
Fear and Paradoxes of War

Through this course, I hope that you will come to appreciate that war is both a natural expression of common human emotions and interactions and a constitutive part of how we cohere as groups. That is, war is paradoxically an expression of our basest animal nature and the exemplar of our most vaunted and valued civilized virtues. You will learn some basic military history and sociology in this course as a lens for the more important purpose of seeing the broader social themes and issues related to war. I want you to both learn about war, but more importantly, use it as way of understanding your everyday social world. So, for example, the discussion of war and gender will serve to start you thinking about how expectations of masculinity are created and our discussion of nationalism will make clear how easy “us-them” dichotomies can be established and (ab)used. I will suggest some readings for you to complement the class and assign some activities through which you will be able to apply the theoretical insights from the course to your observations of everyday life. At the end of the course, you will start to see war everywhere and come to appreciate how much it defines our life. All the features of this course are available for free. It does not offer a certificate upon completion. — Coursera: Fear and Paradoxes of War

https://www.coursera.org/lecture/war/fear-FYLkK

We can also become more aware of different perspectives on 'violence' - not only that of military war but in domestic settings, and self-violence or harm. We are informed by the arts and science.
It starts by looking at the self. The mind. I think.

Because the OP seems to barely have anything to do with war. — StreetlightX

it's probably not a thread on war, but some librarian's bookish take on it from the comfort of a cozy chair somewhere pontificating about war as a matter of ideas and feelings and erasing almost the entirety of what war has ever meant for human beings both today and throughout history. — StreetlightX

Wrong.
The only bit you got somewhat right is 'from a chair'.
Like many here - discussing 'war' and sharing ideas - who don't have first hand experience of war, as usually thought of in military terms. Yourself included, perhaps ?
Quite the ridiculous leap from there to 'erasing...what war has ever meant for human beings...'.
But you know that.

Your other posts speak of 'fear' and 'desire' and 'inner wars' and so on. — StreetlightX

Correct. So what is the issue ?

You previously said:
"One wages war to acquire ..." - that is Desire.
"threats, real or imagined" - that is Fear.

It involves arms, metal, wood and stone. It involves bodies and their destruction, the logistics of moving men and supplies across treacherous lines, the conquering of lands and the negotiation of geography. It involves production at home and the organization of economies for the sake of sustaining troops on battefronts longs distances away, along with defense infrastructure, among other things. — StreetlightX

Of course it involves these things, but it does not exhaust all what is involved and does not cover all of the issues we are discussing.

'Inner war'? What a pathetic notion. The appropriation of the horror of one of the most destructive things that humans do to each other to be twisted into some New Age hippie kumbaya 'find yourself' nonsense. It's hard to imagine anything that makes more of a mockery of war and those who have suffered from it than this kind of spiritualization of it. — StreetlightX

It would have been better if you had used the quote function, to give context:

'War' can be at a personal level as well as global. Individual struggles to conquer inner demons, to find peace. None more so than the soldiers who are conflicted - their concerns that the war they are fighting might not be 'just' - the guilt involved. The realisation that comes when the pockets of dead enemy soldiers are picked or discovered - the diaries, the family photos - just like those carried by themselves. Who is the enemy ?

The moral issues creating an inner war. — Amity

The inner mental conflict of soldiers is well documented. This is nothing like a 'spiritualisation' exercise but a clear recognition of all types of suffering involved, not just the physical.
At the extreme, there is post traumatic stress disorder.
In the past, it was known as 'shell shock' for which there was little sympathy.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/insideout/extra/series-1/shell_shocked.shtml

Terms like 'peace' and 'war' are not just for military talk.
They can be used to describe interpersonal relationships and, yes, even a person's state of mind.

You can't be unaware of any of this. So why the attack - the accusation of 'mockery', huh ?

Thanks for interesting conversation. There's a lot there I didn't know about.
No surprise there - but, after all, that's why I started the thread :sparkle:

Wars have only ever been justifiable from a defensive perspective - I believe that the Allied forces had a moral imperative to win the Second World War so as to save the world from Hitler. But it can never be a good thing, especially now, with weapons that can destroy all life on earth. — Wayfarer

Agreed. The use of force is necessary at times for self-defence.
That is when 'pacifism' turns realistic...

As two time recipient of the medal of honor, Smedley Butler said:

"War is just a racket. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses... — Manuel

War as a racket. That about sums it up. There has always been war profiteering.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_profiteering

You can read the famous booklet by the ex high ranking Marine, here:

https://archive.org/details/WarIsARacket/mode/2up

Thanks for sharing your family story of WWII.

I don't have high hopes for the goodness of man, for universal pacifism or other high mindedness and pompous grandstanding. I believe in the old Roman saying from Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus "Si vis pacem, para bellum". — ssu

So, 'universal pacifism' might not be achieved but there are other kinds, perhaps more realistic.
Peacebuilding interventions - and asking questions about 'whose peace' for whose benefit and at what cost ? Peace has to become the more attractive option - how can that be done ?

'Si vis pacem, para bellum'.
From wiki:

Therefore let him who desires peace prepare for war."

The idea which it conveys also appears in earlier works such as Plato's Nomoi (Laws) and the Chinese Shi Ji.[3][4][5] The phrase presents the insight that the conditions of peace are often preserved by a readiness to make war when necessitated — Wiki

Is there another philosophy for war?
I remember what once war veteran once told me: "In war never forget your humanity".
I think that is a great philosophy especially for an officer to remember.
- ssu

Epictetus & Marcus Aurelius come to mind. Also the contemporary Stoicist writings of James Stockdale and Nancy Sherman. — 180 Proof

:up:
A bit tired now after responding to posts - but all of these I have read to some extent, especially Marcus Aurelius...more later.

"Best job I ever had." — 180 Proof

Thanks.
You might like this article - a personal story of tank warfare - March 2003, Iraq - discussing the film 'Fury'.
https://warontherocks.com/2014/11/best-job-ive-ever-had/

Levinas suggests that war is the complete negation (suspension? à la Kierkeegaard) of ethics and (my read) therefore, paradoxically, it's raison d'etre is to remind us to oppose and then how to recover from war. — 180 Proof

War as the negation of ethics. Permission to kill ?

The latter is an aspect which isn't really given much attention. The history of WWI and WWII shows the importance of fairness in treaty negotiations. One example:

The Treaty created much resentment in Germany, which was exploited by Adolf Hitler in his rise to power at the helm of Nazi Germany. Central to this was belief in the stab-in-the-back myth, which held that the German army had not lost the war and had been betrayed by the Weimar Republic, who negotiated an unnecessary surrender. The Great Depression exacerbated the issue and led to a collapse of the German economy. Though the treaty may not have caused the crash, it was a convenient scapegoat. Germans viewed the treaty as a humiliation and eagerly listened to Hitler's oratory which blamed the treaty for Germany's ills. Hitler promised to reverse the depredations of the Allied powers and recover Germany's lost territory and pride, which has led to the treaty being cited as a cause of World War II.[184][176] — Treaty of Versailles: Rise of the Nazis

...got out of the draft because of college and flat feet. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Wonder how he felt - relieved tinged with guilt ?

My Uncle (his brother) quit Loyala medical school before his senior year and left for Vietnam. — ArguingWAristotleTiff

Did he survive ?

What do you think of the films portraying 'Vietnam' ?
Last night, I watched 'We were soldiers'...

Ave Maria (Schubert) (With Pavarotti)
Bono — ArguingWAristotleTiff

:sparkle:

Instead of just going by the instinct of fighting for the chance of spreading one's genes, we've conjured up other reasons driven by those instincts as the core drive. — Christoffer

That's an interesting take. The 'chance of spreading one's genes', I would have thought would be more about making love than war. In one evolutionary sense, yes, 'war' and fighting is about 'survival of the fittest'.

most major powers of war mostly have a strong military as a necessary protection, but no one really wants to go to a major war (world war size), because it's draining resources and there are no resources left in the nations to conquer. — Christoffer

Global resources such as oil are still available to plunder...
The economic resources involved in war efforts are astronomical.
The profit gained is what some see as the 'good of war'.

...for many, not warring is not an option. Where there is no choice philosophy cannot be of much help unless peripherally. For the people who choose war, I don't see how that can be justified. — tim wood

Well, we can ask : Is it true that 'not warring is not an option' ?

The only time an individual doesn't have choice is when they are conscripted, as in WWII.
Populations don't choose war, it is usually a decision made by those wielding political power.
As to it being 'justified', there are screeds written about 'just war' in philosophy.
For example:
https://iep.utm.edu/justwar/

I'm uncertain just what a philosophy of war is supposed to be. Is it an explanation of it? Is it the consideration of how war should be waged? Does it involve the question of when war is "just"? — Ciceronianus the White

You and me both. I am not a student of war or 'philosophy of war'.
As to your questions, I would say 'All of the above and more...'.

The usual resources can be used to read more:
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/war/
https://iep.utm.edu/war/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_war

More than the various theories, I wonder about your own perspective and thoughts.

I asked earlier if 'war' is seen not as a solution but a problem in itself, how do we solve it ?
What sayest the Pragmatist or Stoic view. John Dewey, Epictetus ?

I have always had a leaning towards pacifism and its philosophy — Jack Cummins

We can't talk about 'war' without discussing 'peace' and pacifism.
As usual, the SEP has an article and its definition.
When defined as 'anti-warism', we need to define war.

War is usually thought of as violence between states or, more broadly speaking, political communities. But the term “war” can also be applied to violent conflicts among individuals, as in Hobbes’ idea that the state of nature is a state of war. Similarly, although peace is usually thought of as a political condition of amicable relations between states, terms like “peace” or “peaceful” can also be used to describe a relation between individuals or even a person’s state of mind. — SEP: Pacifism

There is also the big question of just and unjust war, but I do still believe it is better to find solutions which don't involve war. — Jack Cummins

Indeed. We can even wonder what problem is it that war is supposed to be the solution for.
Is 'war' not the problem, in and of itself ?
How do we solve it ?

Huh? One wages war to acquire territory, resources, people, trade routes, prestige, or buffer zones. Or else to eliminate or subjugate rivals who pose threats, real or imagined, to those things. — StreetlightX

'Huh?' - what is that supposed to mean. It sounds dismissive. Why did you feel you had to start off with that, huh ?

Let's look at 'threats real or imagined' - there are different desires are fears involved.
Fear of invasion. Desire for peace and security. Against different ideologies, competing religions.
Any war of independence isn't the elimination of a threat, as such, it is a response to actual conditions that prevent independence.

'War' can be at a personal level as well as global. Individual struggles to conquer inner demons, to find peace. None more so than the soldiers who are conflicted - their concerns that the war they are fighting might not be 'just' - the guilt involved. The realisation that comes when the pockets of dead enemy soldiers are picked or discovered - the diaries, the family photos - just like those carried by themselves. Who is the enemy ?

The moral issues creating an inner war.

For balance.
There will be other songs or ideas about war which show a positive aspect.
It bringing us together ?
Following on from the war photographer's story:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/572676

https://seattleglobalist.com/2016/05/26/sebastian-junger-veteran-homecoming-town-hall-seattle/51911

Author and filmmaker Sebastian Junger tackles this question in his new book “Tribe: On Homecoming and Belonging,” and in a talk at Town Hall Seattle on Tuesday.

After covering war for more than twenty years, he says he wants to change the way people think about conflict. He believes adversity experienced as a group has the power to create a more cohesive society.

In “Tribe” Junger says that civilians rarely understand the veteran experience and have difficulty building societal cohesion, unless disasters happen on the home front, like 9/11 in New York or the “Blitz” during WWII in London. He points out that violent crime, depression and suicide rates tend to go down during these crises.

Clearly, love and life continue even as wars rage...see any war film...
Though, not sure about the stats re decreased crime, depression and suicide rates.

Anyway, this is the 'Deep Songs' thread...and for sure there were songs written to lift the spirits.
In the UK during WWII, Vera Lynn and George Formby spring to mind...
But what of war itself.
Other places, other times, other people...

[ Edit - couldn't help but start a thread, the first on in ages :
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/11491/war-what-is-the-good-of-war-

Following cartoon theme:
@Nils Loc
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/572211

'War' - Edwin Starr
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01-2pNCZiNk
Original video of Edwin Starr singing his famous song: "War" [Original Music video from 1969]

Perhaps better version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztZI2aLQ9Sw

War...huh...yeah
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing
Uh ha haa ha
War...huh...yeah
What is it good for?
Absolutley nothing...say it again y'all
War..huh...look out...
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing...listen to me ohhhhh

WAR! I despise,
'cos it means destruction of innocent lives,
War means tears to thousands of mother's eyes,
When their sons gone to fight and lose their lives.

I said WAR!...huh...good God y'all,
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing...say it again
War! Huh...What is it good for (Edwin sings 'Wohh oh Lord' over the top)
Absolutely nothing...listen to me

WAR! It ain't nothing but a heartbreaker,
War. Friend only to the undertaker.
Ohhh! War is an enemy to all mankind,
The thought of war blows my mind.
War has caused unrest within the younger generation
Induction then destruction...who wants to die? Ohhh

WAR! good God y'all huh
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing...say it say it SAY IT!
WAR!...uh huh yeah hu!
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing...listen to me

WAR! It ain't nothing but a heartbreaker,
War! It's got one friend that's the undertaker.
Ohhhh! War has shattered many a young man's dream,
Made him disabled, bitter and mean,
Life is much too short and precious to spend fighting wars these days.
War can't give life, it can only take it away!

Ohhh WAR! huh...good God y'all
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing...say it again
War!...huh...woh oh oh Lord
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing...listen to me

War! It ain't nothing but a heartbreaker,
War. Friend only to the undertaker...woo
Peace lovin' understand then tell me,
Is there no place for them today?
They say we must fight to keep our freedom,
But Lord knows there's got to be a better way.

Ohhhhhhh WAR! huh...good God y'all...
What is it good for?...you tell me!
Say it say it say it saaaay it!
War! good God now...huh
What is it good for?
Stand up and shout it...NOTHING

Thank you. At first glance, I thought not for me...but then...woweee :nerd:

Have always liked Paul North's Duckrabbit War. — Nils Loc

I couldn't find the cartoon but the message certainly pinpoints the essence of war. Its absurdity and waste of life... for what ?
The cartoon makes you think.
Just as other art; novels, paintings, music...

https://www.thepostil.com/war-and-absurdity/
The article starts with stark painting:
“For What?” by Frederick Varley, painted ca. 1917-1919.

“They were afraid of dying, but they were even more afraid to show it.” This sentence, from Tim O’Brien’s novel, The Things They Carried, encapsulates the contradictory posture that war imposes on human beings, and this contradiction leads to the recognition that war itself is an absurd act, bereft of any meaning, and existing solely for its own sake.
Thus, war can only invoke and provoke a bleak vision, and an absurdist response, which forms the basis of both Fernando Arrabal’s Picnic on the Battlefield, and Tim O’Brien’s The Things They Carried. In fact, both these works explore the theme of war as an absurd act, in which meaning of any sort cannot possibly exist. — R.T. Ginn

-------

Did you mean Paul Noth ? This site shows his artwork for sale:
https://condenaststore.com/art/paul+noth

-------

When I googled duckrabbitwar, I got this guy:
https://www.duckrabbit.info/blog/2011/07/the-war-photographers-biggest-story-themselves/
Article: 'The war photographer’s biggest story: themselves'
'...Something is missing and that’s the Libyans who were also hurt in the attack. What happened to their stories? The stories of the people that the photographers are risking their lives to tell have been written out of the picture...'
And what about the medical team who saved Martin’s life? Nothing. The real heroes don’t count.

-------

Turning to Garfield. I had no idea how the cat turned so scary. But now I do:

https://hybridtechcar.com/2019/07/27/im-sorry-jon-how-the-internet-turned-the-cat-garfield-from-the-innocent-comic-book-hero-into-a-lovecraft-monster/

Intriguing - how one artist sees the real Garfield as being exhausted with hidden insanity.
'An immortal who knows the pain of eternal life'.

I see this rethinking or replacing of a 'good' character into a surreal nightmare not so much about immortality but about humans. Again, the question of who we are...the mix.

I enjoyed one cartoon which began in usual 'good' mode and then came the undercurrents.

Conversation of John and Garfield over a cup of coffee could end up in that the cat actually controls the master’s mind and inspires the illusion of a normal life.

But John doesn’t suspect anything. — Garfield and John

To view, scroll down through the scary collective mind of the internet... :scream:

Gotta love First Dog on The Moon :heart:
( and the BTL comments )

If all we have left to us is fleeting moments of joy we better make them good. Like these ones!
Everything is always bad so that is enough thanks no more news. No more sadness. Only snacks and fun. — First Dog on the Moon

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jul/26/if-all-we-have-left-to-us-is-fleeting-moments-of-joy-we-better-make-them-good-like-these-ones

what do you mean silly burgers? — Gitonga

to play ˈsilly buggers (with something) (British English, informal) behave in a stupid and annoying way: Stop playing silly buggers and answer the question. — idiom dictionary

Also I've replied to everyone here. — Gitonga

Glad to see the engagement :smile:

Thank you :sparkle:

This is what this thread is about: not just good music, but good texts too, with an existential dimension. — Olivier5

You know just how much this thread has meant to me.
Thanks for having that brainwave and introducing a more complex way of listening to and appreciating music. Music related to self and the whole wide world. In different languages and time.

Also, a great way of feeling on the same wavelength...sometimes by following themes...
Exploring from another's perspective...all good :cool:

In conclusion many people claim to be utilitarian but few people when pressed actually live up to the claim. So maybe they should rethink their ethics? — Gitonga

From your profile:
"...I love having logical debates with people and its how I make friends, but I apply logic not just to philosophy but also psychology, socialising, entrepreneurship and life."

I noticed you have started a few discussion threads but never really engaged with people.
So, what is the point of that ?


But is it a 'True' misunderstanding. Or is it a Mere provocation from a Devil.
Or is the OP just playing silly buggers and is full of 'it...
As per other threads started: 'Stoicism is bullshit' and 'Economists are full of shit'...

Whatever, it does raise interesting questions acting as an entry point...


Thanks for the link to:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demandingness_objection
At the end, there is a further link to
https://www.utilitarianism.net/objections-to-utilitarianism/demandingness
which forms part of the 'textbook' introduction to utilitarianism:

The aim of this website serves as a textbook introduction to utilitarianism at the undergraduate level. It provides a concise, accessible and engaging introduction to modern utilitarianism. The content of this website aims to be understandable to a broad audience, avoiding philosophical jargon where possible and providing definitions where necessary. — utilitarianism.net