Human has a long history of waging war and in conflicts, there is evidence especially for us that the last century is most violent in the history of mankind because of documentation of all wars. We glorify war with honor, sacrifice, selflessness, and war unite the nation. The argument about human nature and war has two concepts emerged one who says, yes we are hardwired to war while others say, that no the human is a rationale and peaceful and is not predisposed to war. Yes, humans can be violent but are war innate to human nature, there has been extensive research on this and there has evidence found that human have peacefully co-existed in ancient times. The violence has been seen in this millennia because of complexities emerged in population and relation of individual and state, state to state relation but it does not mean that we are genetically designed to war.
A collection of human remains 10000 years ago has shown to be the earliest evidence of warfare. The remains that were unearthed at a site called nataruk suggested of violence appeared in hunter gathered groups in 13000 and 800 bc. While separate Japanese studies showed that despite having the capacity for mass violence they show restrain and gives an idea of peaceful co-existence. It was echoed by john Keagan in his book a history of warfare rejected the notion that war was deeply rooted in humans.yes, there are many pieces of evidence in history that human has coexisted together. As humans progressed, the population grew technological advancement happened hierarchical structure appear monopolization of resources stated they were shifting towards a more complex structure of the group. In the new paper, Fry and Soderberg looked at ethnographic histories of 21 nomadic forager societies, compiling a database of every well-documented incidence of lethal aggression that could be found in reputable accounts spanning the last two centuries.
They counted 148 incidents in all, of which more than half involved a single person killing another. Only 22 percent involved multiple aggressors and multiple victims, and only one-third involved conflicts between groups. (Kien,2013)
These conditions move them to war and conflicts. Archeologists suggest the first war in the Mesolithic period around 9700 .now no one argues about violence is not in human history but the difference that human nature is warlike or more peaceful.
Save your time!
We can take care of your essay
- Proper editing and formatting
- Free revision, title page, and bibliography
- Flexible prices and money-back guarantee
Humans have desired to dominate and stay alive. For this purpose they do anything, Hobbes explains human nature that human is brutish, selfish, nasty. Hobbes explains that individuals are in a war of all against all. Human kills other is called a homicide, not war is collective and one group one is against the other . In this we vs they concept is established, this concept establishes itself through different reason kinship in the early time, languages, same state, religious and cultural cohesion with each other, common enemies, competition over resources but still if we see that human has celebrated war whether it is ancient times or modern times. How can an individual go to war for to sacrifices itself it is warlike tendencies which leads him to decide? Steven Pinker explains that yes humans are warlike but violence has been a decline in recent times. He further that we cannot only focus on one type of trait of human, but it can also be selfish warlike and can have peacefulness empathy. Human nature depends upon the environment that is provided in terms of political social economical so his brain works according to that. Hobbes explains individual is selfish but talks about the absolute sovereign. How can any human accept single sovereign if he has warlike tendencies then the state would emerge state comes in to form by comprising its own for the greater good for humans have to live peaceful yes he violent and brutish? Francis Fukuyama was also of view that human nature is warlike and it has emerged through ten thousand years and inherited into modern times.
Rousseau explains human nature as noble. The human can co-exist in peace he believed that man, by nature, is good was espoused by the French philosopher, Jean Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778). He believed that people in the state of nature were innocent and at their best and that they were corrupted by the unnaturalness of civilization. In the state of nature, people lived entirely for themselves, possessed absolute independence, and were content. (younkis,2005)Human nature and chimps comparison of two are also humanare peaceful if they have emerged from chimpanzees Bonobos and chimpanzees are highly similar to each other in many respects. However, the behaviour of the two species differs in important ways1. For example, male chimpanzees use aggression to compete for dominance rank and obtain sex, and they cooperate to defend their home range and attack other groups3. By contrast, bonobo males are commonly subordinate to females and do not compete intensely for dominance rank(prufer, munch,paabo,2012) this rejects the idea that humans are like chimpanzees aggressive in nature ut is possible that they have emerged as a peaceful being
The concept of war varies from ancient times and we saw that men simple gatherings were less likely to go war as compared to in complex structure. If we compare today’s we can say we are more prone to wear because of multiple groups, state s, religious ideologies, the form of government, state relation in terms international relation is anarchic but one cannot defy that peaceful community does not exist like EU and US can be taken as an example for more like we take an example of India and Pakistan in which warlike tendencies found due political situations. Between America and China, the more competitive form is found there is less they will because of the presence of deterrence.we have where war is based on the ethical approach. So different regions represent different scenarios. To claim merely that human nature is violent genetically is bold statement yes one agrees that human this trait is driven by political race and ideologies and often we study more about war as compared to peace we glorify and our achievements in the field of war to future generation peace study have recently emerged.
To conclude humans have both tendencies in their genes he can be empathetic as well cruel. A human can wage war and sign peace it is totally dependant on what scenario or circumstances are there. Human is a peaceful creature, but violence cannot be removed it is present in our social, political, and economical level. So wars are not going away in near future.