i ponder this.

[zhul4nder]

If what divides us is what we know about each other, would we be united if we were mysteries to each other?

[Cloud0005]

Re: i ponder this.

If everyone keeps secrets from each other, society would crumple. Together we stand united we fall.

[Tater Tot]

Re: i ponder this.

If everyone keeps secrets from each other, society would crumple. Together we stand united we fall.

What? I think you mean "United we stand, Divided we fall."
Edit: Unless you meant to say that if one of us falls, we all do.

[zhul4nder]

Re: i ponder this.

But division comes when we understand a certain aspect of one another. The white race back in the day, had they not known the color of skin, segregation would not have happened. Violent religious wars are fought because people associate with different religion creating divisions as well. There are many examples.

[Cloud0005]

Re: i ponder this.

What? I think you mean "United we stand, Divided we fall."

No it's how my teacher tought us.
We stand together and die together.

[zhul4nder]

Re: i ponder this.

I think tot was referring to the American motto. What your teacher is teaching you is a military man's ethics.

[Adamaja456]

Re: i ponder this.

knowing nothing about each other wouldn't unite us IMO..because there is nothing to bring us together.

what we learn from each other brings certain people together and divides other people. i don't know, thats just how i see things.

[ledwix]

Re: i ponder this.

"If what divides us is what we know about each other, would we be united if we were mysteries to each other?"

So uh...what you're saying is:

1. What we know about each other divides us.
2. Therefore, what we don't know about each other doesn't divide us, a.k.a. "unites us."

The 2nd statement alone isn't even logically necessary, because not dividing us doesn't necessarily mean "uniting us." It could just be a totally neutral statement with respect to the first one. But the correct contra-positive of the 1st statement, given that the 1st statement is even true, would be "What doesn't divide us isn't what we know about each other."

I think it's clear that being "mysteries to each other" would create more division than whatever the degree of division is now. Unity is common ground...the mysterious invokes fear and clinging to a few people we consider trustworthy but being careful about everyone else. It happens all the time in politics; advertisements like "How much do we REALLY know about Barack Obama?" Even though these types of ads logically don't follow at all, they invoke the type of mysteriousness and fear that will stir up our emotions in the way they are intended to be stirred up. Uncertainty is the driving force of fear of others, not unity.

[zhul4nder]

Re: i ponder this.

then how is it possible to know enough to rid of that fear that divides us? I'm sure millions out there don't know Obama's intentions in office, niether do I, yet people vote and side with him. Knowing enough provides enough unity than knowing too much which, in the Obama case, would lose supporters ''de'unify because certain aspects will not sit well with them.

[poleaxe]

Re: i ponder this.

Knowing too much can divide us but knowing too little could divide us more. If you know too little you are going to be curious, scared, paranoid, distrusting, and skeptical. If you know too much then you might come to hate them for something, be paranoid, and if paranoid most likely distrusting as well. If you know too much and you still get along you are most likely dating someone for a long time but not married yet.

[zhul4nder]

Re: i ponder this.

Then the question should be is it better to know or to be ignorant? Stay ignorant and get along fine. Knowing, you will risk the chance of something you don't think is worth trusting.