Margaret Mead was an anthropologist of her time, which was her reasoning for conducting a scientific study of the development of a variety of human beings and their societies and finding its connection to the development of warfare. As an anthropologist Margret Mead often studied her theory through observation of culture. Considering the two types of schism of the development of warfare, Margaret Mead is convinced that through the combination of both sociological inevitability and biological necessity, it is a reason that cultures use warfare. But in 1940, Margaret Mead argued in her essay, “ Warfare Is Only an Invention- Not a Biological Necessity,” that through research and case study she believes to have proven that war is not a biological necessity and is not “in our genes”, but clearly is an invention of mankind that had developed over time and is used today when someone is outraged our there is a sociological need for certain resources leading to the need of starting warfare. Warfare started out as an invention and developed through …show more content…
Those who believe that war is a biologically necessary would argue that it is “in our genes.” They would say that man or women have an instinct to aggression, in which they were born with. When fighting a war the behavior is a main factor when fighting. They believe that behavior is a prerequisite to achieve full potentials as an individual in war. For those who support this theory that war is a biological necessity observe those individuals that have a drive for competition and aggression that go into war with the “genetic” erg to fight for what they believe in. It is a state of nature that humans choose to fight and have the courage to kill those of the opposite opponents. There is always those who try to prohibit competiveness and discover more contemporary idea, with less socially harmful affects, to give those who are “biologically” aggressive an ability to express their nature of
A simple act of violence can genuinely affect an individual's state of mind. Through violence, individuals feel empowered and are tempted to prolong their violent nature. This results in one heinous act, following with worse violence. In Shakespeare’s Macbeth and Ishmael Beah’s A Long Way Gone: Memoirs of A Boy Soldier, both authors effectively highlight a theme, that violence will ultimately lead to more violence.
The theme for this chapter is that war changes people for the worst because when Mary Anne, (Fossie 's girlfriend) comes to the medic camp, she is an good down-home American girl of her time but, as time advances, she becomes more intent to join the fight and become a soldier. She starts to sneak off during the night and never coming back to be with Mark Fossie. Eventually, she leaves him to live in the woods. Soon after she is seen, and she has transformed from how she was at the beginning, as a normal American to what she is today. This shows us how war can change people not for the better but for the
In the novel, “Red Badge of Courage”, Henry first begins as an immature, prideful, and vain boy. He is often suggested as “The youth”, if the novel. On page 42 he is related to as “the youth.” Also this reference is made on page 3 and many other pages. As Henry battles through conflict and trials, choices and consequences, we find him at the end, a young, matured man.
Numerous individuals begin playing fierce war recreations at a youthful age which prompts simply growing up with the mentality that being savagery is alright. Another case from our reality that may not be as evident is the "drive by" when individuals see a mishap out and about, we need to perceive what's
However whilst it comes with a severe loss, war is also a time to be proud of your country, to hold your heritage with august and to admirably bear a nationalist spirit. War, as it seems, is and has been part of nature itself for as long as mankind have roamed the earth. As seen with countless examples within the animal kingdom, many living creatures tend to form groups to survive. Through time, humans
When talking about war, there are many books with few answers to what war truly is. Barbara Ehrenreich brings forth not only the possibilities towards understanding war but also the passion people from history have had towards it. One key issue she brings to light is humanities love for war, so much so that people would use excuses like holy wars to justify their need to fight in a war. She declares that war is as muddled as the issue of diseases and where diseases came from around 200 years ago. More so than that she even goes further on to state that these rituals that date back to prehistoric times are the cause of human nature during times of war rather than human instinct.
The origin of this brutality, as
This concept of punishment and the way it is applied to children leads to the first of Heinlein’s criticisms of western society, that being the refusal of western society to turn its children into adults in Heinlein’s eyes. A second criticism that Heinlein makes about western society has to do with western society’s aversion to war. Heinlein believes that war is a natural, valid, and necessary. When it comes to war, Heinlein takes a social darwinist perspective, believing that war is merely an extension of the competition which animals face in nature which drives evolution. Heinlein’s two main justifications of war have to do with population.
Chandra Manning’s book was, What This Cruel War Was Over is a great book that mixes civil war history, with first person accounts from the soldiers, which just brings history alive. Manning explores many topics throughout this book such the soldier’s family life, culture in both the north and south, and of course what the civil was over. Manning makes it very clear that the civil war was over slavery. I find this argument very convincing, because she uses ample of evidence supporting this statement through first person accounts, and it is a very simple and reasonable point to make when talking about the Civil War. However, I think she fails to recognize that there were other contributions that could easily be blamed for the Civil War, such
Emotional death is the absence of feeling, which mainly occurs during war after one has been so painstakingly injured and suffered immensely that the only way to survive is to rid themselves of any emotional ties. The “death” explains the perception and realization of survival throughout war. In the novel Night, Elie explains the feeling of emotional death, “One day when I was able to get up, I decided to look at myself in the mirror on the opposite wall. I had not seen myself since the ghetto. From the depths of the mirror, a corpse was contemplating me” (115).
Throughout the world, violence has occurred in some form in each individual’s life since the beginning of time. Violence is any action, inaction, or structural arrangement that results in physical or nonphysical harm to one or more animals. There are three types of violence to classify the act, which is Institutional, Interpersonal, and Structural. Within each type of violence are specific categories that occur, such as family, religion, educational, corporate, and even economical violence.
Violence isn't the way to achieve ones goals. Almost everyone has someone of something that stands in the way of their ultimate goal. Many people come to a point where they feel that the only way to achieve that goal is at the expensive of another. This isn't necessarily the case. Rather then inflicting violence on one another we must use the intelligence we were blessed with.
Throughout Chapter five of her book Shadows of War, Carolyn Nordstrom shares her views on war in terms of social, physical and mental goals and punishes of such violence. To begin, one of the first goals of war as defined by Nordstrom is a direct result of a threat of loss of control. She explains that it is common for one military to feel the need to destroy another when their control over a certain (land area owned or controlled by someone) is under threat (56). An interesting point that Nordstrom makes is relating to/about (community of people/all good people in the world)'s do not tell the difference between the existence of different violences. As stated by Nordstrom, most people will naturally tell/show the difference between different wars; however, very few tell/show the difference between the experience of violence throughout such wars (57).
This is a violence that we ourselves create because we hurt ourselves by underestimating our skills and our ability
The violent conflict approach is defined through coercion, threats, and destructive assaults. Galtung’s, model suggests that each of these components influence one another, and while each