SparkNotes: A Separate Peace: Important Quotations …
Before considering the external and internal aspects of religion, it is important to note that within any religion, there is a potential spectrum of possible perspectives on the teachings of that particular religion or spiritual tradition, including how those teachings relate to world peace. First, there is religion as socially-learned behavior, i.e., as part of culture--what can be called "organized religion." Here religious beliefs, rituals, and institutions are learned and passed down from one generation to the next, and religious institutions are an integral part of the social structure and fabric of culture.
SparkNotes: A Separate Peace: Key Facts
Galtung's structural view added the idea that certain structures, both in the international system and in the community, can be either violent or nonviolent, and that changing such structures was a fundamental task for peace research. Nonviolence under this rubric expands beyond Gene Sharp's original conception, as Sharp himself did in his study of social power and political freedom, (1980) to include not only group actions, but also the social, economic and political structures within which they occur. For example, the international system, which prior to Galtung's theory had been viewed by most peace researchers as a positive contribution to peace, was the focus of intense criticism from peace researchers after the theory was published in 1969. Previously it had been seen as evidence of increased cooperation between states, but after 1969 it was redefined as an oppressive, violent, macro structure that caused the deaths of millions of people per year through the starvation and inequalities it caused. For example, even though there is enough food in the world to feed everyone, millions die from starvation every year because of the structure of the international economic system. A nonviolent international (or domestic) economic system would ensure that no one would starve as long as there was enough food in the world (or country) to feed them.
Holistic definitions of nonviolence have of course been present in the Western literature for a considerable time, with Eastern traditions in general, and Gandhi in particular, having made the greatest contribution to our understanding of this spiritually-based type of nonviolence. The distinction between nonviolent action as a technique of struggle versus nonviolence as a philosophy and way of life has provided the basis for discussing nonviolence in the West, thanks to the work of Gene Sharp in the West and Mahatma Gandhi in the East and their respective perspectives. Whereas Sharp has stressed the functionality of nonviolent action and its value as a technique for waging conflicts--a technique he believes to be superior in pragmatic terms to violence--the Gandhian nonviolence as a way of life school has always adopted a deeper view of nonviolence, based on a centuries-old Eastern tradition that stresses an inner, spiritual peace component
Finny appears to the reader only from Gene's perspective
Up to now, Western peace research has tended to focus on peace as the absence of negative or undesirable things (including war, physical violence, and structural violence, on all levels). Even the concept of "positive peace" has been defined as the absence of structural violence. It is clear that a peaceful world cannot be created only by eliminating negatives: one must also have a clear vision of what one wants to create in a positive sense. These positive attributes of peace include both inner and outer dimensions. The field of Future Studies is a good place to look for some of the positive aspects of creating peace in the world, i.e., outer peace, as well as certain aspects of inner peace. In this regard futurists often quote Fred Polak who said "A civilization without positive images of itself is doomed." Global spiritual traditions are the obvious other place to gain insight into the multileveled different aspects of creating and experiencing inner peace. As peace research adopts a broader inner-outer framework for considering peace, it is likely that insights and experiences from explorations of inner peace will help create a more balanced view of outer peace in which positive peace can become a desirable ideal in its own right, rather than a concept that is defined in terms of the absence of something undesirable.5. Peace Research Must Explore and Include How Cultures Influence People's Perceptions of 'Peace' as Well as How Much People Believe the World Can Be Changed or Not.
In a globally interdependent world, it is critical that peace research include perspectives on peace, and how to create it, from different cultures around the world and that people be open to dialoging with each other on these various perspectives on peace. Peace research must explore how different cultures (and religions), and their underlying values, influence (often unconsciously) how peoples (including peace researchers) from different cultures perceive "peace'--both in the negative sense of what they want to eliminate, as well as in the positive sense of what they want to create, and indeed how culture itself influences how much people believe they can change their conditions of life in the external world or not. For example, Western cultures are much more likely to believe that the external world can be changed by actions in the external world, and therefore to focus their energies in this direction; whereas Eastern cultures may accept the state of the external world more and focus instead on their inner world. In short (while noting the dangers of over generalization) Western cultures have been called "doing cultures" while Eastern cultures have been called "being cultures." Peace may require both of these perspectives in the twenty first century. Insights from the fields of anthropology, intercultural communication, comparative religions, and the ongoing inter-religious dialogue should help in this endeavor.