Japanese social media debate over war experience and understanding
Users dispute whether understanding war's horror requires firsthand experience.
What to know
- A debate emerged on whether understanding war's terror requires firsthand experience or can be grasped abstractly.
- One user expressed alarm that dismissing non-experiential understanding of war is itself frightening.
- A counterargument suggested that experiencing peace should similarly grant understanding of its value.
The dispute Whether abstract understanding of war requires firsthand experience, or whether experiencing peace already provides sufficient understanding. · positions read across 1 posts and comments
War's horrors can be understood intellectually without direct experience; dismissing this understanding is itself alarming.
-
“「戦争は恐ろしい」と言ったら「そんなの体験しなきゃわからないじゃないですか!」と返ってくるほうが恐ろしい。”
@ETakiyam · X/Twitter ↗
Those with peace experience should understand peace's value; failure to do so is the real problem.
-
“「平和の尊さ」を体験しておきながら何もわからん奴が!?”
vanilla_vodka@fedibird.com · Mastodon ↗
@ETakiyam Social media uservanilla_vodka@fedibird.com Mastodon user
How it unfolded 2 developments, newest first · click a bar or a number to jump posts
-
2
vanilla_vodka challenges the premise on peace experience
A Mastodon user responds by inverting the argument, suggesting that people who have experienced peace should also understand it, and questions how someone could experience peace yet understand nothing.
“「平和の尊さ」を体験しておきながら何もわからん奴が!?…”
— vanilla_vodka@fedibird.com -
V
「平和の尊さ」を体験しておきながら何もわからん奴が!? https:// x.com/ETakiyam/status/20994878 69274644742?s=20
-
-
1
@ETakiyam posts critique of dismissing war's horror without experience
A user on X/Twitter posted in Japanese expressing concern that when they say "war is terrifying," some respond "you can't understand without experiencing it"—a response the user finds equally frightening. The user questions when war became something mythical like Ryugu-jo (a legendary undersea palace).