When I ask people what world peace means to them,I rarely get a coherent answer. When I do, they generally express the same sentiment:

Authors Avatar

Peace

“If you could have one thing, what would it be?” The classic answer to this

question, of course, is world peace. When I ask people what world peace means to them,

I rarely get a coherent answer. When I do, they generally express the same sentiment:

“Where everyone is happy and no fighting is taking place.” Yet a dream scenario such as

this can never truly exist, even in a utopia. This impossibility leaves me wondering

whether peace is just an unattainable goal, or something different, more personal and

more possible.

A dictionary defines peace as a state of existence with an absence of conflict.

Again, the unattainable goal of “peace” is the basis of this definition. Dictionaries,

although they print a strict definition, cannot take into account all the different

connotations of a word. Dictionaries also cannot begin to explore what a word means to

different people based on their experiences. I once knew someone who worked as a

peace keeper in Bosnia. He told me that his job description included disabling people

who tried to disturb the “peace.” He commented on how ironic this was, as he, by

Join now!

disabling people, was not actually being peaceful himself. He said that he had to break

the peace in order to keep the peace. His definition of peace was one of organizations,

religions, or groups of people that did not physically fight or hurt each other. My mother

and father share a definition of peace. They believe that peace means the absence of

conflict. My mother, however, went on to say that peace is not the unattainable goal I

thought it was, but a rallying point, a place of agreement, something that unites rather

than divides. The use of “peace” as ...

This is a preview of the whole essay