In psychological theories, Psychologist have argued that human beings, especially men, are inherently violent.While this violence is repressed in normal society it needs the occasional outlet provided by war. This combines with other notions, such as displacement where a person transfers their grievances into bias and hatred against other ethnic groups, nations, or ideologies.If war is innate to human nature, as is presupposed by many psychological theories, then there is little hope of ever escaping it. One alternative is to argue that war is only, or almost only, a male activity and if human leadership was in female hands wars would not occur.
In Anthropological theories, Antropologists see it as fundamentally cultural, learnt by nurture rather than nature. Thus if human societies could be reformed war would disappear.
In Sociological theories, Sociology has long been very concerned with the origins of war, and many thousands of theories have been advanced, many of them contradictory.Some use detailed formulas taking into account hundreds of demographic and economic values to predict when and where wars will break out.
In addition to the theory of the above three, Various theories exist.
I agree with Anthropological theories. War is not a natural thing. People to the war for what purpose. For example, In order to control the people and other countries or Religious issues and so on. We believe through social reforms, such a problem, can be solved, while we are changing the consciousness of people. But I wonder To say there is no war, can you assure peace of the world?
No comments:
Post a Comment