So, assuming you mean no opposing forces have been wiped off the face of the planet (like entire countries destroyed), and there’s no one-world religion, ect., and that you’re basically implying its today’s world but with peace…and since this is obviously a stictly hypothetical question as humans are too stubborn for there ever to really be a world without conflict..

Said hypothetical world without conflict, would be generally peaceful, i.e. no wars, no mass deaths, no political harassment, no religious persecution/aggression. All the countries would have higher education, I imagine, because ..well, honestly, dumb people get pissed off and act out, thus causing violence and death, a lot easier than smarter people do. The environment would be equally balanced to preserve nature and allow humans to thrive. Every government would listen to all its people and ask of them realistic compromise so that common ground among diverse peoples can be maintained, and in turn, the people would listen to their governments by not disobeying laws, especially laws that exist to protect.

I don’t think it’d be stagnant. The human race usually doesn’t advance from outdoing each other, we usually advance because we need something so we invent that something to better ourselves and our environment. People would still invent things and even use their minds more because they would all talk to and learn from each other. Healthy competition would exist but competition isn’t the same thing as conflict.

You didn’t give specifics in your question so I’m just giving some basic answers.

Study and get a good grade! =]

Yes, that is what ‘without conflict’ means. Thanks for explaining… The original post even said no problems or wars.

“well, honestly, dumb people get pissed off and act out, thus causing violence and death, a lot easier than smarter people do”

Who do you think leads wars? Who do you think starts them? It’s not under educated people, it’s not dumb people. It’s politicians, generals, etc… Have you ever heard of Sun Tzu or Machiavelli? Do you really think they were dumb? You’ve never seen a healthy debate, have you? Or an academic meeting at a college? Especially if tenure is involved…

“The human race usually doesn’t advance from outdoing each other, we usually advance because we need something so we invent that something to better ourselves and our environment.”

Where on earth do you get that from? You just thought it sounded nice, right? Every major advancement in human history has been due to conflict – we went to the moon to outdo the USSR in the cold war. Science came about when people wanted to free themselves from the control of the church and the upper class, back in the days of the renaissance. Companies invent better products because they want to make more money than their competitors.

Peace would not stop advancement, but that wasn’t the question.

Lack of conflict would bring us to a screeching halt. Why would we want to change anything? No problems means nothing to solve. No conflict means everything is perfect. If everything is perfect there is no reason to do anything. We might as well just sit still and contemplate our navels while the world goes on around us.

Hope this helps .

—I did not necessarily mean war and violence. Conflict could be something as simple as a good old fashion debate. I enjoy some healthy conflict in my relationship. If I agreed with everything everybody said that would be lame.

http://www.absolutewrite.com/fun/is_conflict_necessary.htm

http://www.dadashri.org/lifewithoutconflict2.html

http://www.colorado.edu/conflict/peace/essay/wehr7492.htm

http://www.zmag.org/content/ForeignPolicy/chomwsf2t.cfm

These might help