@bullet @bullet

Each reader is first asked to reflect upon the question: "Is a non killing society possible?" If not, why not? If yes, why?l For the purpose of the question, a non killing society is taken to be a human commu­ nity from smallest to largest encompassing all humankind that has the following characteristics: There is no killing of humans, at least, and no threats to kill. There are no weapons for killing ("hardware") and no legitimisations, justifications, or permissions to kill ("software"). And there are no conditions of society that depend for mainte­ nance or change upon the threat or use of lethal force. That is, a nonkilling society is taken to be one in which humans neither kill nor threaten to kill each other. The response of most political scientists is likely to be that a nonkilling society is "completely unthinkable" for at least three reasons: lethal human nature; scarce resources that lead to conPhilosophy begins when someone asks a gen­ eral question, and so does science.