#Cyberpeacefare #Misunderstandings #Louis D Brandeis

"Nine-tenths of serious controversies which arise in life result from misunderstandings; result from one man not knowing the facts which to the other man seem important, or otherwise failing to appreciate his point of view."  Louis D. Brandeis

misunderstanding: 1. a failure to understand or interpret correctly 2. a disagreement or quarrel.  American Heritage Dictionary

Views: 125

Tags: #Cyberpeacefare, #Louis, #Misunderstandings, Brandeis, D.

Comment

You need to be a member of Global Ethics Network to add comments!

Join Global Ethics Network

Comment by Valentine Olushola Oyedipe on February 11, 2016 at 6:47am

I quite agree with you Mr. Al. In deed "Golden Rule" has been emphasized in virtually all religions.

Comment by Al LeBlanc on February 10, 2016 at 10:49am

Valentine: Seems to me social media is a cyberworld medium for world-wide interconnected-near instantaneous transmission and reception of Individual Thoughts and Possible Dialogue so that, potentially,  "both parties can appreciate their point of view."  However the parties, need to first of all, "listen and receive the messages being transmitted and second "know the facts which the other man seem important" e.g., the common acceptance of the "Golden Rule" in:many religions and the "common good".

Comment by Valentine Olushola Oyedipe on February 10, 2016 at 8:42am

Mr. Al. can social media/cybermatic ideas provide a level playing ground of understanding such that both parties can appreciate their point of view?

Carnegie Council

Privacy, Surveillance, & the Terrorist Trap, with Tom Parker

How can investigators utilize new technology like facial recognition software while respecting the rights of suspects and the general public? What are the consequences of government overreaction to terrorist threats? Tom Parker, author of "Avoiding the Terrorist Trap," discusses privacy, surveillance, and more in the context of counterterrorism.

A Parting of Values: America First versus Transactionalism

"The existing divide in American foreign policy discourse has been the extent to which the U.S. must actively propagate and spread its values, or defend them or promote them even when there is no interest at stake," writes Senior Fellow Nikolas Gvosdev. How does American civil society demand consideration of moral and ethical concerns in the decisions both to go to war and how the war will be prosecuted?

Suleimani Is Dead, but Diplomacy Shouldn’t Be

Carnegie Council fellow and Pacific Delegate Philip Caruso advocates for the value of diplomacy in the aftermath of the U.S. killing Iran's general Qassem Suleimani. "Iran cannot win a war against the United States, nor can the United States afford to fight one," he argues. This article was originally published in "Foreign Policy" and is posted here with kind permission.

SUBSCRIBE TODAY

VIDEOS

SUPPORT US

GEO-GOVERNANCE MATTERS

© 2020   Created by Carnegie Council.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service


The views and opinions expressed in the media, comments, or publications on this website are those of the speakers or authors and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions held by Carnegie Council.