{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
7/19/2013 1:59:22 PM
14
Primitive human society 'not driven by war'
[quote]Primitive society was not driven by war, scientists believe.
Researchers from Abo Academy University in Finland say that violence in early human communities was driven by personal conflicts rather than large-scale battles.
They say their findings suggest that war is not an innate part of human nature, but rather a behaviour that we have adopted more recently.[/quote]
As far as im concerned this is rubbish, large scale war cannot happen between 30 or so people since most tribes had around 100 or so people in them. (According to some research).
You add more people to the mix and the capabilities of that group increase to the point thousands of people can fight each other. tribes conquered each other to increase their size and strength.
Saying war isn't part of human nature is stupid, it's a natural instinct that every animal on this planet and any other race in the universe has. You see apes fighting for territory and they are considered our cousins, so if they fight why should be any different??
Human's have a bigger brain and thumbs but we are still bound by nature, yea a lot of us have the need to fight laying dormant but our fight or flight reflex tells us a different story.
Our survival fuels the need to fight.
-
1 ReplyAn intelligent post by lonepaul? Refuting the BBC? Good man.
-
[quote]They say their findings suggest that war is not an innate part of human nature, but rather a behaviour that we have adopted more recently.[/quote]Who ever truly thinks this is a fucking idiot. It's always been human nature to control and conquer.
-
Competition is the law of the jungle. Cooperation is the law of civilisation.
-
War is a numbers game.
-
2 RepliesWell, looks like I'm not going to be trusting BBC as much; War is human nature.
-
1 Reply[quote] Saying war isn't part of human nature is stupid, it's a natural instinct that every animal on this planet and any other race in the universe has [/quote] Humans and only a couple other animals (Chimps and a certain Ape I think) are the ONLY creatures known to exist that will kill each other. So no, war is not universal at all, not even close. But it IS human nature, if you define war as two groups killing each other. The scale of the battle doesn't matter.
-
This just in: populations of 30-40 individuals can't engage in 1000-person battles. Finnish researches ask for more funding to confirm this research, as well as more weed.
-
18 RepliesYou cannot have war without government of some form. Only when societies develop governance do they begin to engage in warfare, so self ruled societies might still have violence, but they lack the force to pressure individuals to fight. I agree with the article in that war is not inevitably a part of the human condition, because I do not believe government is a necessary part of the human condition. There have been self-ruled societies in the past, there exists ungoverned lands today, and I believe we will see more in the future. And with less government, there will be less war.
-
War is a byproduct of population pressure. Its the mass fear of having to do without necessities, even if those items aren't necessary. War is one group, tribe, kingdom or nation stealing things from another. It might be clear, as in WWII with Germany's Lebensraum and Japan's "Asian Sphere of Influence," or more hidden with the European Crusades need for wealth using religion as the excuse (a LOT of gold went north.) I think that the scientists above missed something. Its just my opinion that they missed it, but I think they missed it all the same.
-
I also call crap on this study, from a methodological point. The reason that the developed world is developed is thanks to the conflict and drive to out do the other country/religion. So studying the undeveloped tribal cultures to show that warfare isn't part of their development is seriously short sighted. The reason they are still tribal cultures is because they were isolated and so didn't get into territorial conflicts with the drive for technology to beat the enemy to advance them to a similar level to the developed world. Also, they ignored the Zulus and Maori both fairly primitive tribal cultures but also highly warlike. This are the things just standing out as bloody obvious, so if you went over the study in full I'm sure there would be plenty of other flaws waiting to be found. I just hope this isn't used as Ammo for the anti-war hippy mobs.
-
2 RepliesI (slightly) disagree. I would say that [b]survival[/b] is human nature. Sometimes we believe that fighting is necessary for survival so we wage war. Other times we think that cooperation is necessary for survival so we form alliances.
-
That's bullshit, people have been killing the crap out of each other since forever.
-
2 Replies[quote] Saying war isn't part of human nature is stupid, it's a natural instinct that every animal on this planet and any other race in the universe has. You see apes fighting for territory and they are considered our cousins, so if they fight why should be any different?? [/quote] They don't have wars, though.
-
No, I agree with you. Another aspect of it could have been the lack of communication or group identity.
