Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Arguments for and against pacifism
Albert Einstein's contributions to the world
Essays about pacifism
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In the modern era we recognize pacifism from its great figures on non-violent resistance. Ghandi, and Martin Luther King, Jr. stand as the most recognizable and prominent figures of the ideology. However, these figures do not provide a complete picture of pacifist thought. Pacifism has a long and distinguished history stretching from the origins of Christianity to the modern day. This review will evaluate and compare the ideological characteristics of early 20th century pacifism from two distinct angles: 1.) pacifism based on Judeo-Christian tradition, using Leo Tolstoy as an example; and 2.) pacifism as a secular belief, with a focus on the writings of intellectuals Bertrand Russel and Albert Einstein. While they share the same basic ideological …show more content…
The pro-military policies of these states provide an opposition to the pacifist view which advocates for disarmament. The Axis power’s defeat in WWII began a new age in geopolitics known as the Cold war. A nuclear arms race had begun between the Soviet Union and the U.S.A. each competing to become the next great superpower. This new potential for global destruction prompted a response from the pacifists of the day, exemplified by the “Russell-Einstein Manifesto” published in 1955. In this manifesto we see the combination of thought from two contemporary intellectuals and pacifists in Russell and Einstein. Bertrand Russell has been described as “the last great radical” due to his contributions to liberal and pacifist thought. He advocated for world government, disarmament and human equality. Einstein, in addition to being one of the most important scientific minds of his time, also was a life-long pacifist, adamantly expressing his anti-war, pro-humanist political views throughout his life. Both Einstein and Russell were heavily influenced by the realities of WW1 & 2 and the creation of atomic weapons, their views on which led to the collaboration in writing their pacifist …show more content…
To reiterate, while both author’s share common beliefs of anti-militarism, shared equity and human rights, it is the justifications for such beliefs that differ. There is a level of rationalism vs. traditionalism in this difference. Russell and Einstein hold their base for pacifist belief in focusing on the well-being of others and shared human experience. Tolstoy uses Jesus’ teachings of non-violence to arrive at the same conclusions as Russell. Both Author’s show concern over the human experience, Einstein and Russell plead for the future of humanity, while Tolstoy discusses the persecution of pacifist cultures throughout history. The concern for the human condition is a common feature of pacifist ideology, emphasizing the citizen over the state. They both speak of the destructive power of continued violent policies by nations and the mutual benefits, from a humanitarian perspective, of the adaptation of pacifist policies. This is a very idealistic view, and idealism is another important characteristic of pacifism, but in a practical sense goes against human nature. It is this view of human perfectibility that provides the biggest critic against pacifism. While the visions for the world to end all violence seem, at times, overly ambitious, it is because of the ideological influence provided by these pacifist minds that real action to disarm some WMD’s was taken, as well as the development of human rights, it is
¬¬¬Though most American people claim to seek peace, the United States remains entwined with both love and hate for violence. Regardless of background or personal beliefs, the vast majority of Americans enjoy at least one activity that promotes violence whether it be professional fighting or simply playing gory video games. Everything is all well and good until this obsession with violence causes increased frequency of real world crimes. In the article, “Is American Nonviolence Possible” Todd May proposes a less standard, more ethical, fix to the problem at hand. The majority of the arguments brought up make an appeal to the pathos of the reader with a very philosophical overall tone.
Most writers take sides, either for or against the atom bomb. Instead of taking sides, he challenges his readers to make their own opinions based on their personal meditations. One of the key questions we must ask ourselves is “Are actions intended to benefit the large majority, justified if it negatively impacts a minority?” The greatest atrocity our society could make is to make a mistake and not learn from it. It is important, as we progress as a society, to learn from our mistakes or suffer to watch as history repeats itself.
guard and says 'all who live by the sword, will die by the sword.' And
Diener, Sam. "A Pacifist Critique of Gandhi." 1 September 2006. PeaceWork Magazine. 10 March 2014 .
Violence has been recorded down in our history from the dawn of time; it seems that in the past, violence was the answer for all disputes. Though time has progressed, “violence has been in decline … and today we are probably living in the most peaceful moment of our species’ time on earth” (Pinker). This decline in violence helps illustrate that mankind has been able to change, by dealing with conflicts in a peaceful manner, for violence is now not the first option to deal with issues. This turnaround also shows an evolution in mankind’s thinking process and ethics. Mankind now has understood value in living; thus, this has allowed for peace to play an integral part in society’s culture today.
Concerned with the United States’ awareness of the potential consequences resulting from the bomb, Einstein penned another letter to President Roosevelt, emphasizing his “[great concern] about the lack of adequate contact between [scientists] who are doing this work and [Cabinet members] who are responsible for formulating policy” (Einstein, Letters to Roosevelt). Even though his communication was too late to change the United States’ mind about dropping the bomb, the outcomes of the resulting explosions in Hiroshima and Nagasaki led Einstein to fight for world peace. Einstein’s battle for issues such as international control of weapons and freedom of speech were complicated significantly by the Cold War, but he stood by his beliefs until his final days (Einstein Video 3). Looking back on Einstein’s life, it can be said that his experiences with changing his mind due to world events prompted him to become a leader, and his work with physics throughout his life gave him the platform to communicate his views with any
Mohandas K. Gandhi, a great Indian philosopher, wrote the essay “My Faith in Nonviolence”. His essay focuses on the use of nonviolence means on overthrowing the British rule of India. Gandhi’s main claim on this essay is that love is the higher law of life and that “every problem lends itself to solution” (p. 203) , if we followed that law.
The realism that will be the focus of this paper is that of Kenneth Waltz. Kenneth Waltz presents his theory of realism, within an international system, by offering his central myth that, “Anarchy is the permissive cause of war”. Kenneth Waltz’s central myth helps answer the question as to why war happens in the first place. During the cold war, there was a heightened sense of insecurity between Russia and the United States due to presence of nuclear weapons. The Movie Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb used cold war tension between the two countries to tell the story of a general who went crazy and decided to unleash his fleet of nuclear bombers onto Russian military bases.
Coined by French peace campaigner Émile Arnaud, pacifism is opposition to war and violence, meaning a pacifist is one who opposed to war and violence. In Romeo and Juliet, Benvolio is a prime example of a pacifist. Pacifists are oftentimes, and almost always the peacemakers of a story, dismantling fights and arguments. Through pacifistic ideas, anger, and Mercutio’s optimism, Shakespeare tells us that Benvolio is a peacemaker who does not wish for quarrels.
War is a hard thing to describe. It has benefits that can only be reaped through its respective means. Means that, while necessary, are harsh and unforgiving. William James, the author of “The Moral Equivalent of War”, speaks only of the benefits to be had and not of the horrors and sacrifices found in the turbulent times of war. James bears the title of a pacifist, but he heralds war as a necessity for society to exist. In the end of his article, James presents a “war against nature” that would, in his opinion, stand in war’s stead in bringing the proper characteristics to our people. However, my stance is that of opposition to James and his views. I believe that war, while beneficial in various ways, is unnecessary and should be avoided at all costs.
Albert Einstein is a famous scientist known for his Theory of Relativity and his famous formula E=mc2. Einstein sent a letter to the white house warning the US about uranium being used to create weapons of mass destruction. Einstein’s point of view is that these weapons are extremely powerful and the US needs to be warned about them.
...oal of such violence is to obtain a greater moral good. But antiwar pacifists maintain that the ends do not justify the means, if the means are murderous. It is a tragic mistake to believe that there are great moral goods that can only be claimed by war and the amount of moral good obtained by war is often greatly exaggerated and inequitable.
Pacifism holds that all violence and war are morally wrong, and that Christians should not participate in warfare in any way. Pacifists literally take the “turn-the-other-cheek” and “love your enemies” (Matthew 5). They must be ready to accept violence without resistance or retaliation. Christians must never use force, even in personal self-defense. Pacifists believe that Christians who condone violence and warfare do so by relying on philosophical arguments, not on biblical text and that they have become corrupted by values that are a part of the secular world. Having a new identity in Christ and being a part of the Kingdom of God (2 Cor 5:20 and Philippians 3:20), Christians must not become entangled in this world’s affairs. Pacifists make the point that one’s loyalties and obligations are to God and when there is a conflict between obeying God or obeying one’s government, “we must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29). Discussion: Have participants read 2 Cor 5:20, Phil 3:20, Acts 5:29) Ask: Is it possible for someone to love their enemies if they are killing
WWII is a great example that the world is infected by the hatred of neighboring nations, the actions they are bestowing upon each other, and the sickening events that happened and are predicted to happen in the near future are very effectively summed up by the sayings of Albert Einstein. Einstein offers his very powerful opinions on man’s hateful doings when he says “It is my conviction that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder.” By saying this, Einstein is telling the reader that killing is morally wrong even when under the influence of war but unfortunately, these days, soldiers are put into war with the mindset that killing is okay as long as it is for one’s country. By saying this Einstein is also telling one that the killing of another human should be punishable no matter what whether one is...
Mahatma Gandhi believed in a system of non-violence, or ahimsa, that “could change and heal situations of conflict and human nature itself” (xxxi). He believed that there was a need for “radical transformations in human lives, relationships, and organizations… and the interconnectedness of these” (xxvi). Gandhi “recognized the need to create a social environment in which this sort of disciplined personal life and consequent transformed personal relationships could flourish,” (xxvii) which sparked the idea of ashram communities where people shared a vision of “authentic human life and the disciplines which enabled it” (xxvii). Furthermore, Gandhi pushed for the civil disobedience of “people unwilling to conform to the laws of the legislature”