This paper explores Horgan’s thinking that war is evitable (avoidable), in his article War, What is it good for? There is evidence presented by Horgan (from both apes and hunter-gathering societies). Some of the practical steps that Horgan thinks global society needs to take in order for a war to be eradicated will be discussed in this essay. In the article by Horgan, he gives an explanation how war gives nothing but only wastage of food, fuel, and equality of the sexes. Studies say that war and fights can come to an end if there is no money left for fighting a war. In this essay, we would be discussing how apes and hunter-gatherers rage war in their group and how can it be eliminated. Studies for apes and human have shown that females are gentle and kind therefore, reducing the increase in war. Giving education and equal power to women to stand similar to man in the country could help reduce warfare. Education, food, home, and independence are the key factors that could help eliminate war and fights among people.
War can be evitable: It gives nothing
War is an act made by human beings and apes as depicted in Horgan’s article. It is a human nature. As long as there are human and apes existing there will be war. But in his writing, John Horgan agrees that war can be avoided as it gives absolutely nothing. War evolves other problems drifting away from the solution. War gives sickness, poverty, and kills people. War is the key to problems and removing it would make other social problems eradicable. In context with Horgan’s article war could be made evitable by following some steps that need to be taken by global society.
Horgan thinks war is avoidable as he stated in his article how Frans de Waal says that “War is evitable if conditions are such that costs of making war are higher than the benefits. As humans are calculative and know what is best for their interest and will leave what no longer is their interest” (Horgan, 2008). During the last few years, research have been made on rival troops of male chimpanzees killing and using each other. Archaeologists and anthropologists have evidence of the war that took place in their researches of prehistoric and tribal human societies. De Waal states that studies show how monkeys, apes and Homo sapiens can overcome aggressive tendencies and can eliminate fights (Horgan John, 2008). They could make up after by sharing sustenance, embracing and prepping each other. De Waal proposed that species like chimps, bonobos can live cheerfully without battling on the off chance that they have association and equivalent access to sustenance. Bonobos live joyfully and have less battles since they have enough assets, less chasing, no male strength and a colossal measure of sex.
With regards to Horgan’s article, Douglas has distinguished 74 non-warring societies and his rundown of non-warring societies incorporates itinerant seeker gatherers. He states deadly brutality held on among the seeker gatherers and these battles would at some point prompt fights among companion and relatives. Douglas accepts to reject those quarrels and engaging females in the general public can lessen the rate of brutality in the nation. For instance, in Finland, there is a low rate of wrongdoing and savagery than some other nation as the larger part of priests and Member of Parliament are female (Horgan, 2008). While Wrangham states that male seeker gatherers inside a similar band once in a while execute each different as they have clashes inside the gathering. Wrangham agrees with Fry that instructing ladies and giving financial charge in hand can open doors and can diminish clashes.
After reading Horgan’s article and understanding the aspects of war, I agree with Horgan, that war is evitable because all love to live peacefully and in harmony with other people. Our thoughts are same and this could happen if we take serious actions for our society. We could start eliminating starvation homelessness and providing equal rights. Also at the point when De Waal says if conditions are with the end goal that the cost of making war is higher than the advantages, we would eliminate war, as when the cost of fighting war raises nobody would want to invest in that. Moreover, Douglas Fry in his books Beyond War writes that because humans “have a substantial capacity for dealing with conflicts nonviolently” (Horgan, 2008) they could bring an end to the fights and try to deal with problems in a good way. Starvation, homelessness, and loss of everything are due to warfare so we should follow steps such as providing education, equality among male and female, food, and independence in order to eradicate war.
J. H. (2008, April). WAR WHAT IS IT GOOD FOR? Retrieved January 21, 2018.