Can Whole earth ever be united as one ???

[Prashant]

There are numerous countries residing on earth, fighting for their separate existence against each other for their own reasons. One country encroaching the boundary of other country for profit or other reasons.

 

In such a situation can there be any cirumstance under which whole earth (human beings) unites and becomes one unit ??

Can there be any case where ppl would go above the bars of caste, colour, creed, race and become only residents of earth??

 

This is exactly the question I have to debate upon after 1 week, so I thought i need some good points that you ppl can give me.

 

Well I go for yes and my reason is that there are several issues on which one country, race, creed or caste can't do anything. For that matter consider environmental issues, they can't ever be solved untill all ppl of earth think as one unit.

Different ppl have different opinions but a violent and mad clash of ego and prestige is never a solution but intellectual debate certainly can give one.

[majazac]

I'd go with no. And very simply because of human nature. Altough Platon said that humans are social animals, they are also deeply selfish. Never ALL humans would agree. Specially cuz being so selfish, one's answer, vision, solution would ALWAYS be the correct one. And everyone, or at least, the great majority thinks like that, wants to be right. There is fanatism, there is crazy people. The great "mark", the great "symbol" for human kind is it's diversity. There'll be no earth without diversity. Think about how to make the world one? Witch culture choose? Witch language? Currency? Flag? Anthem? Every country, every culture, every religion proclaims to be the best one...

 

See why problably there'll never be unity?

[HerLoss]

If the heads of the major countries got together and slowly started introducing the idea of a united world, then yes, but there is no way that enough people would support the idea right away, and wouldnt see the benifits of uniting, so it would take so much time to introduce the change gradually, that it would never survive the changes in leadership in the different countries that occur periodically.

[nilayz]

Nope.. they wud never unite... ppl are more interested with their own ideologies they follow.. be it political, cultural, even music. Not all ppl like the same kind of music... not all ppl are same... variety is the spice of life

[Prashant]

Guess then I will have to advocate for NO in the debate to win the competetion.

But yet something in me tells me when their will be an external attack (read alien attack which is supposedly more powerfull than the earth's resistence) then for survival all human race will unite and then as soon as the war is over, "no matter whether humans win or lose, they will split as if they were indifferent and never knew each other"

[majazac]

To win, yes, you'll have to pick NO. Because there is much more arguments to NO than there is to YES. As I said and nilyaz said too, human being is selfish and would always stood up for their believes as the better one.

 

In the case you mentioned, of an alian invasion, then maybe they would unite. But it wouldn't be a real unity. I would be a unity in an emergency, an animal impulse to survival. For the same reason you would unite with your worst enemy if your life were at danger. It's a mere impulse not a real unity. So therefore, speaking of a real unity, then I still go with NEVER. Even with the progressive unity that HL mentioned, would still be almost impossible, because of the language, religion, cultures, believes barriers. Everyone would want to adopt their own as the one.

[Prashant]

To win, yes, you'll have to pick NO. Because there is much more arguments to NO than there is to YES. As I said and nilyaz said too, human being is selfish and would always stood up for their believes as the better one.

 

In the case you mentioned, of an alian invasion, then maybe they would unite. But it wouldn't be a real unity. I would be a unity in an emergency, an animal impulse to survival. For the same reason you would unite with your worst enemy if your life were at danger. It's a mere impulse not a real unity. So therefore, speaking of a real unity, then I still go with NEVER. Even with the progressive unity that HL mentioned, would still be almost impossible, because of the language, religion, cultures, believes barriers. Everyone would want to adopt their own as the one.

 

Well the debate is over now and I have neither won nor lost. It was a tie.

I advocated for "YES" instead of "NO" because my mind and soul were just not willing to produce something that was artificial to them.

 

Unification is key to success for me or for anybody. Just Imagine sitting in your home all day and night without TV or Internet or XBox or PS2 and not going out just because you thought you were selfish???

The flaws are in everybody but they can be removed only if you have somebody to point and urge you to remove them.

I wanna live with optimism and I believe in what I think. Someone had said "For I believe Therefore I am", Same goes here.

Every Human is unique and that's what according to people spreads diversity but that's the thing that spreads unity as well. No one is perfect and the uniqueness of each human being comes in this way only.

Since nobody is perfect one has to depend on another and other has to on another and chain goes on and on finally forming a Matrix of the order "n*n".

[majazac]

i'd have to agree in certain aspects. As I said, humans are social animals. They relly on the others to live. They need other people to survive. That's certain. But one thing is to speak in a minor term and the other is a global stand. I'm social, i have plenty friends, love to hang out, to leave. But still, if you ask me if I agree, let's say, that english should be world's language and islam the religion of everyone, or that i should sing la marsaillese instead of my national anthem, then i would deny. Even if the thing at stake was world unity. But that doens't mean that i hate all this or that i disagree that anyone should applaud it. That just mean that I would like to keep my cultural, country identity. So that's the problem with world unity and human selfish nature. Is to decide what would be the "pattern" to a global identity instead of local ones.

[Prashant]

i'd have to agree in certain aspects. As I said, humans are social animals. They relly on the others to live. They need other people to survive. That's certain. But one thing is to speak in a minor term and the other is a global stand. I'm social, i have plenty friends, love to hang out, to leave. But still, if you ask me if I agree, let's say, that english should be world's language and islam the religion of everyone, or that i should sing la marsaillese instead of my national anthem, then i would deny. Even if the thing at stake was world unity. But that doens't mean that i hate all this or that i disagree that anyone should applaud it. That just mean that I would like to keep my cultural, country identity. So that's the problem with world unity and human selfish nature. Is to decide what would be the "pattern" to a global identity instead of local ones.

 

I always you don't have to be identical to be united. Small clashes take place everywhere even in the families between parents and children But that does not split them apart.

Take a look at cluster supercomputer, Its not necessary that all its nodes should have similar configuration (as the OS generally *nix is programmed to use each node to the maximum). A similar society can also exist. Our uniquesness is our strength as for this paves the path to unification (as this uniqueness is also our incompleteness). Our culture, country, language, religion at local level can be different. But at the core we should be the same only humans ready to fight with all adversities and to acheive what he aims.

Unification can also exist in diversity, The Universe is more beautifull and glorious than just Milky Way or Any other galaxy.

[nilayz]

Small clashes take place everywhere even in the families between parents and children But that does not split them apart.

 

Naah... small clashes are something different and bombing cities is something else. Even between families if the clash is too strong, they could even kill one another.. humans are hungry for power and they can go to any level to be all-powerful, controlling others and eventually making others follow their own ideologies.

[Prashant]

Naah... small clashes are something different and bombing cities is something else. Even between families if the clash is too strong, they could even kill one another.. humans are hungry for power and they can go to any level to be all-powerful, controlling others and eventually making others follow their own ideologies.

 

Yeah I can't deny the fact that human over all has an invidualistic attitude. Like lions he loves being alone and independent but like sheeps he wants the feeling of security as well. These mixed feeling can sometime make him paranoid and he doesn't know what he is doing and why.

 

A cool, calm and confident (triple C) mind can overcome any problem thrown infront of him. A human can raise himself from all these basic instincts by establishing self-control and descipline, and then the world may get a platform to unite.

[roote]

i think men are to much desiring for power, so it can't be until all men kind will understand that power is not the most important thing - it's the love and peace that important.

[naynesh]

I think women need more power in the world but men need to be edging in front because they do jobs.Why cant people just realise if you continue fighting its going to create wars in the world.Everyone should aree on something.I know how about every country get 10 billion times 1 million sq miles.

So there will be 10 billion spent on things every sq million mies.

[mushroomz]

No, I don't think it will ever. Maybe if like one country grows super strong and makes a clone army like in Star Wars it can conquer the Earth. But I think that our cultural differences and views and beliefs and what not will always clash. It's been happening for thousands of years, and there will always be people that cannot tolerate other people (that is bigots). So it would be very difficult for nations to unite if their view on moral and ethics is different because they probably won't agree on the same laws or even form of government.

[AverageJoe]

I think you guys are looking in all the wrong places. The question happens to be, "can we all live together as one united earth?" but I don't think that is the question you guys should be asking. I think something more appropriate would be, do we want to live together, as one united whole?

 

I heard one person comment that we should give a x amount of money every square mile, so we don't have to worry about people being poor, or getting less. But the problem with this is that, the person who works 50 hours a week, at a hard, laborious job, isn't going to be happy when the hobo, that picks up a few plastic bags, gets the same perks.

 

As for us all being one country, I find that it would actually be quite a bad thing. I'm not sure that we should put the power of the entire world into one govt. No matter what, we will never have a perfect world.

 

Another important factor to include, is that a unified world would not be culturally diverse. Many people in different countries have different customs, and laws, which we do not. The problem would be that most people would not get the govt. they wanted anyways.

 

I think that the U.N. is a descent step to becoming a more, peaceful world, but I do not find a unified world at all appealing.

 

Joe