Monday in class we debated about whether warring/warfare is inherent in human nature, and our debate spread into the other question Mr. Crotty asked of us: is war inevitable?
I think they are two different questions, and I have two very different answers. I believe (contrary to my unfortunate position in the debate) that war IS an inherent part of human nature. Humans are by nature greedy, afraid of differences, and paranoid. These three factors are in my opinion the root causes of war. (If I missed any, please suggest others… I probably did.)
Examples are easy to find. European colonialism in Africa was caused by greed. World War II was started by the Germans (yes I know I’m oversimplifying things) because Hitler needed a scapegoat and it was easy to get the Germans to fear the Jews’ differences. Paranoia starts wars of preemptive strikes, such as some of the more recent “wars” America has been involved in.
May I add that the “pacifists exist” point is a relatively poor one. War begins with fights, and even pacifists probably get angry about something.
So what about this inevitability factor? Will it continue until the end of time, or at least the end of ants and humans? Not necessarily. Yes, history does state otherwise, but the world is constantly changing. I don’t think we can continue to live the way we have for the past few thousand years—especially in terms of what has changed from tribal relations to foreign policy. Nuclear power has changed everything, and we have the capability to blow ourselves and everyone else up if the wrong leader gets the wrong idea in his head at the wrong instant. Sooner or later, someone will have to realize that something must be changed, and war will be the first thing to go.
What do you think? Is my opinion possible? Can war be overcome if it is a part of human nature? Or is it simply highly improbable?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Prior to our debate, I would have agreed with you. But I think being forced to argue that war is not an inherent part of human nature made me realize that it actually is not. You make the point that even pacifists get angry, which is completely true, but when does anger elevate into warfare? I also agree with you that greed, paranoya (sp?), and being afraid of differences are all inherent in humans. But I don't believe that these traits, or any negative traits for that matter, directly affect whether war is inherent in humans.
To me, something that is inherent in humans means that it happens without much thought or contemplation about it. I believe that these things come out as a natural reaction, something that humans can't control. Going back to my point in class, sex is inherent in humans because it is a natural reaction that happens to everyone no matter what type of environment a person grows up in. This is different than warfare being inherent because the type of environment a person grows up in directly affects whether a person agrees or disagrees with war.
I think i may just copy and paste this comment in response to everyone's.
Even though I disagree with you that war is inherent, I think you raise some interesting points. Though I am hopeful, I don't know if war can be overcome. It seems possible if we stop it from being popularized in culture. Yet, with the advent of the nuclear bomb and rising technological advances, it seems inevitable that war will always happen no matter what. So, in reference to your blog title-- "Inherent, no; inevitable, yes."
I think many people realize that something must be changed, but I doubt war will be the first thing to go. Most likely, it will be the last because we will always have the option to defend ourselves or attack with nuclear power-- or in countries with similar, but not as powerful weaponry.
In response to Sam's comment, anger can elevate into war, in my opinion at least. It seems that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict or "war" that is going on right now is based upon Israeli anger and frustration, not so much political differences as the conflict may seem to suggest.
Seemingly everyone is writing about this and each time I say that I am somewhat split over the issue of warfare being inherent in human beings. However, I do have a distinct opinion concerning the inevitability of war. I believe that in today's world, and most likely for as along as humans continue to exist, war will be inevitable. Most humans would like to avoid war at all costs but there will always be those who embrace it. Most people would like to solve issues diplomatically but there will always be those that simply can not be negotiated with. I know it is just one example but look at WWII. How many times did Chamberlain (PM of Britain) and the rest of Europe try to negotiate with Hitler in an effort to prevent war? All their efforts were meaningless because Hitler could not be negotiated with and he was going to start a war, no matter what the rest of the world tried to do. I believe that there will always be the Adolf Hitler's of the world, people in power who crave warfare, and for that reason, I see war as inevitable.
Although I haven't pointed this out yet in my previous comments, I would like to compare us (as humans) to our most comparable species: monkeys. As you say, war is inherent because of things such as greediness, paranoia, and our fear of differences. I agree with you on that point and would only like to add one more point (although crazy) to your argument. Our DNA is extremely similar to that of primates and it is a proven fact that one group of monkeys wage war (or conflicts or whatever you want to call them) on other groups of monkeys. Although this argument might make me seem delusional, I would like to think of it as somewhat valid.
I feel that when you say "Humans are by nature greedy" that you are somewhat wrong (or at least in my opinion). I feel that humans have grown accustomed to wanting material possessions and have been fed with the concept/idea of fulfilling ones dreams. While one can be greedy, I do not feel that humans are greedy by nature. Other than that you provide a great argument for the side favoring the belief that war is an inherent part of human nature.
I agreed alot with you said in your post. There are so many traits that we have as humans that seem to lead us into war. I'm still confused as to whether that counts as being inherent though. I felt as though it did but after hearing people say that it's not inherent if it's an extreme that comes from those traits. I'm still confused so who knows.
Good post Tess. Your last point about how Nuclear power has changed everything I have to agree with, but when you state that any leader could lose their cool and blow up a nation in the matter of seconds is accurate, but unlikely. You say that war is in our nature, but so is fear. What person in their crazy minds will order the destruction of an entire country, when he knows that his own country will be fired upon in minuets. I believe that we will never uses Nuclear weapons, and if we do no one will survive. It will be the end to the world.But as you said war is in our nature and we have had that for thousands of years, why change now?
Whoa I definitely think war is inevitable. Regardless how much the world changes, not matter how many ppl are even on this earth. We will NEVER get along and we will always if not for a very long time be dependent on resources. The more recourses that become depleted, the more fighting will be there for them. Our world has changed drastically the past 3000 years, but war has always been around, that is one thing that hasnt changed and will not ever
Post a Comment