The diversity of personal convictions engenders a complex and often tragic clash of values, which profoundly influences the perception and choice between peace and war.

The Tragic Dilemma of Values: War or Peace?

The diversity of personal convictions engenders a complex and often tragic clash of values, which profoundly influences the perception and choice between peace and war. Different individuals, relying on their inner principles, assign varying significance to categories such as love for the homeland, respect for humanity, and adherence to lofty cultural or spiritual ideals. For some, the duty to the Fatherland and patriotism demand defense even at the expense of military actions, while for others, humanitarianism, mercy, and the preservation of genuine spiritual life—untainted by the distortions inherent in both war and an artificially imposed peace—are of greater importance.

For example, one source notes that “the tragedy of human life lies in the clash of values of different orders, in the inevitability of a free choice between two equally dear values and truths. The Fatherland is an unquestionable value, and patriotism is a lofty state of mind. Yet, love for the Fatherland can come into conflict with the love for other, equally undeniable values... And war can only be accepted tragically.” (source: link txt). This emphasizes that the choice between war and peace does not represent a simple dichotomous decision, but rather the result of an internal struggle between equally important convictions.

Another source asserts that the blurred conflict between “total war” and “universal peace” is an illusion of choice, since both war and peace, in their extremes, detach a person from their natural needs and human nature: “The choice between total war and universal peace, as everyone proclaims, is in fact no choice at all. War is inhumane, but universal peace is just as inhumane, albeit in a completely different sense: it is alien to real human nature and unattainable for earthly human society.” (source: link txt). This indicates that personal beliefs play a decisive role in the interpretation of reality: what one perceives as an acceptable means of defending and asserting their principles, another may see as the loss of true human essence.

Thus, the diversity of personal beliefs forms each individual’s unique stance on war and peace. The internal struggle between values, as shown in the aforementioned sources, renders the decision exceedingly complex and often forces one to make “tragic” choices—where both options have their positive and negative aspects. For many, this dilemma becomes not merely a question of strategy, but one of deep personal and spiritual responsibility for the fate of both the individual and society as a whole.