Describe the World at Peace

Many people say they want peace in the world.

But what exactly are we working toward?

The word "peace," I've come to realize over the years of putting Imagine Festival together, is neither concrete nor active in many people's perceptions.

This is important because vocabulary shapes our impression of the world in which we live.

People have words for the things they need to talk about -- or are in the habit of talking about. The Inuit, for example, famously describe snow in very precise terms most likely because precise descriptions are critical to their survival.

But beyond language reflecting our world, one linguistic theory holds we may be able to perceive only what we have language for and not be aware of things we cannot name.

The words of war in our culture are pervasive and concrete: battalion, flank, troops, skirmish, battle. We use them often in our everyday business & sports metaphors: warrior spirit, battle for supremacy, the most dangerous weapon in the offense, shotgun formations, blitz, sacks, my ideas were shot down, your criticisms were on target....

These war phases are familiar and heavily color our view of and approach to our world.

The words of peace could develop as much richness, concreteness and color, if we choose to give them such attention.

I suggest that describing peace more precisely is critical to our survival.

If the word "peace" is nebulous, it will be all the more difficult to figure out how to get there.

If we describe a location as "North America," do we turn north or south from here?

So what exactly do we mean by "peace"?

For me, the form is not the place to start in creating anything. I find it more useful to describe the experience. What would that world feel like to live in?

With that in mind, in the next blog, I will list what I consider to be the top characteristics of this world at peace.