War is often said, for instance, to be caused by “ideology” or by “the culture of militarism” of this or that state 10 or by “a marked tendency for the military to prepare offensive military plans.” 11 But saying war is caused by an arms race is about as meaningful as saying homicide is caused by someone buying a gun. Historians are particularly prone to claiming that the reason a lot of people do something is because they all are just following each other, a perfect tautology. Tautological explanations proliferate in the field of war studies. There is no drive or instinct that builds up, gives rise to aggression, is satiated upon release, and then builds up again…Furthermore, humans also have a genetic inheritance shared with fellow primates for peacemaking, and that propensity must also be factored into the equation.” 9
![call of the sea chapter 6 constellation puzzle call of the sea chapter 6 constellation puzzle](https://dochero.tips/img/60x80/eckhard-loos_5e12de4b097c47ad268b4597.jpg)
8 The best study of instinct theories concludes: “Human warfare, and indeed killing, are too rare to be the product of a drive that needs to be satisfied. Unfortunately, all tests for the heritability for violence have failed completely. One can proliferate tautological instincts at will, but only evidence counts. From Clausewitz’s “instinctive hostility” 5 and Freud’s “instinct for hatred and aggression” 6 down to biologists’ statements that war is “macho male sexual selection” that “accelerates cultural evolution,” 7 none of them notice that simply assuming an instinct for war without any neurobiological, genetic evidence at all is wholly tautological, saying no more than “the group’s desire for war is caused by the individual’s desire for war.” Since tribes and states spend more of their time at peace than at war, one must also then posit an “instinct for peace,” which, through group cooperation, should favor survival even more. Instincts and Other Tautologies: The most popular cause of war is that it is a result of a human instinct for destruction. Instead, they break down war causes into three general categories:ġ. The standard explanations given for war by political scientists and anthropologists equally avoid clinical understanding. Most historians of war have given up in advance any attempt to understand its causes, claiming “it is simply not the historian’s business to give explanations.” 3 Genocide, in particular, appears outside the universe of research into motivations, since if one tries to understand Holocaust perpetrators, one is said to “give up one’s right to blame them.” At best, historians avoid the psychodynamics of the perpetrators of wars entirely, saying, “Leave motivation to the psychologists.” 4 Although homicide and suicide are now studied as clinical disorders, 2 war, unfortunately, is not.
![call of the sea chapter 6 constellation puzzle call of the sea chapter 6 constellation puzzle](https://www.mejoress.com/en/wp-content/uploads/bridge-puzzle.jpg)
Nations that start wars are not considered emotionally disturbed–they are either considered as rational or they are “evil,” a religious category. 1 War, unlike individual violence, is usually seen solely as a response to events outside the individual. What sort of strange emotional disorder is it that war cleanses, liberates and saves people from? And how can killing, raping and torturing people be acts that purify and restore hope in life? Obviously war is a serious psychopathological condition, a recurring human behavior pattern whose motives and causes have yet to be examined on any but the most superficial levels of analysis.Īll standard theories of war deny that it is an emotional disorder at all.
#Call of the sea chapter 6 constellation puzzle full
They don’t need “purifying” or “liberation,” and their everyday lives are already full of hope and meaning, so they don’t need a war to save them from anything.