NationStates Jolt Archive

Will humanity ever outgrow the need (or desire) to go to war?

I think we will, but not for another thousand years, at least.

Not until it brings us to the brink of destruction and we realize that, in order to survive, we must cooperate and not fight over petty reasons.

This is only feasible through a pre-Apocalyptic world

It simply isn’t anything which can be outgrown.

No, because man is a natually violent creature.

Never happen. Our genes have equipped us for it, and they're incapable of recognizing the difference between roving clans with stone tools and nuclear-armed nation-states.

We will destroy ourselves.

I don't know.

Probably not until we stop worshiping Profit.

We can, but it will require a great deal of change that few of us are willing to take seriously.

Will humanity ever outgrow the need (or desire) to go to war?

I would hope that we do, yet I am not sure . . .

We can, but it will require a great deal of change that few of us are willing to take seriously.

Like dissolution of government?

Like dissolution of government?
beat me to it


but my post count still goes up :)

I remeber Letila (or one of her followers) saying that she expected people to eventually come around to set up anarcho-communist societies around the world. She said that this would probably not happen for another thousand years. Perhaps wars would end upon the establishment of such a society?

I remeber Letila (or one of her followers) saying that she expected people to eventually come around to set up anarcho-communist societies around the world. She said that this would probably not happen for another thousand years. Perhaps wars would end upon the establishment of such a society?

1. Letila is a guy.
2. Hell no; should be reserved for fantasy books.

beat me to it


but my post count still goes up :)

I have'nt posted here in a month, and when I did somebody yelled at me for my bad grammar and spelling.

The last war will happen when somebody finally manages to take over the world (me) Turning it into a tight nit Police state that is suprisingly enjoyable. You wouldn't think it would work but MY government would be able to resist all wars.

Will humanity ever outgrow the need (or desire) to go to war?

Troops will advance: humanity will not.

Until we evolve. Evolution takes thousands of years, but it can be sped up with interracial marriages...

Until we evolve. Evolution takes thousands of years, but it can be sped up with interracial marriages...
Not really. Human evolution made the races different for a reason. Now we’re just mixing the pot again. It’s probably actually going to take longer to evolve into something noticeably different. But then again why evolve when we can just get technology to do things that we naturally can’t?

Humans are violent by nature but there are other ways of getting our ya-ya's out that don't involve war. Thank God for video games.

We will have to eventually outgrow war since as we see with the 'war on terror' the world is a small place and one illl-conceived action can have catastrophic aftershocks that affect all (what goes around comes around as it were). And with growing populations, shortened food supplies and material resources we will have to depend on the United Nations with our full support for their unbiased opinion in order to solve disputes. The fact that no one country controls the UN ensures that a judgement will be fair.

Thankfully the number of democracies on the rise in the world and uncooperative/dictatorial countries are fading away so it shoud be easier.

So in about 100 years war will end itself just from the natural evolution of things. Should be easy since the world will be out of oil in 60 years anyway :D

Not really. Human evolution made the races different for a reason. Now we’re just mixing the pot again. It’s probably actually going to take longer to evolve into something noticeably different. But then again why evolve when we can just get technology to do things that we naturally can’t?

The ultimate Evolution

Thankfully the number of democracies on the rise in the world and uncooperative/dictatorial countries are fading away so it shoud be easier.

What the hell makes you think democracies are peaceful?

War will always be a state of affairs so long as death is a threat to the human being. There's always going to be conflict between individuals. There's always going to be an uneven spread of resources at some level no matter how equitable a society may be simply because the universe is not perfectly fractal. War may eventually end, but not before we evolve into an entirely different species. Homo sapiens sapiens is hard-wired for destruction.

What the hell makes you think democracies are peaceful?

Well, of course democracies are peaceful. Just ask Saddam.

Originally Posted by Siljhouettes
Will humanity ever outgrow the need (or desire) to go to war?



It's possible. Humans have made choices before not to go to war. They just didn't make enough of them.

Unless we reprogram human nature completely at the most basic level, not just propaganda fed to them since before they can talk, humans will never evolve beyond hate, and it's probably a good thing. War keeps the population down and if the wars are against well enough armed opponents it means great leaps in technology.

Unless we reprogram human nature completely at the most basic level, not just propaganda fed to them since before they can talk, humans will never evolve beyond hate, and it's probably a good thing. War keeps the population down and if the wars are against well enough armed opponents it means great leaps in technology.

Oh, come on! Human population exploded in the twentieth century, despite the fact that mass murder was virtually perfected in the same span. All those unbelievably bloody wars made only the smallest blip on population increase.

I submit that population is limited only by resource scarcity.

humans have the power to reason, and with that, we are able to form concrete beliefs about the world. you can see all over these forums that people just don' like when others disagree with them. difference in ideals is something humans will always have, and is almost always the reason for conflict.

Not really. Human evolution made the races different for a reason. Now we’re just mixing the pot again. It’s probably actually going to take longer to evolve into something noticeably different. But then again why evolve when we can just get technology to do things that we naturally can’t?

Well, not really. Evolution doesn't 'reason'. Its a process that just works with what it has available and doesn't choose any path to follow, nor does it know what is going on elsewhere. Like all things natural it just 'occurs' and has no set philosophical 'plan'. It's like asking why the wind blows. It doesn't need a reason to blow. It just does.

The process that makes different races or breeds (in the natural realm and not artifically like we did with dogs and selective breeding) is genetic drift.

Genetic drift is what made people different breeds and if left alone will eventually speciate the human population. The 'drift' occurs when populations are seperated by some boundary (water, mountain, valley, political boundaries, etc.) and are prevented from interbreeding.

Interracial matings, however DO improve the genetic quality of a species. Just like how mutt dogs are genetically healthier than inbred pedigree dogs.
So I am all for interracial mating. In fact, interracial breeding is altogether beneficial for a species and may hasten evolution by introducing crucial new genes.

As for 'evolve' that's a very troublesome term to use. We are always evolving. It could mean changing to a higher or lower form of life. But I must admit humans have more control over themselves and their environment more than any other creature so 'lower' probably isn't in the cards. We don't know what the destination is and since evolution only works in the present and we don't know EXACTLY how its progressing its probably best we not worry about it a whole lot. Let it be.

Then we have genetic research. What will that create for the future? GATTACA? If GATTACA does occur it will only weaken the genetic pot. I point you towards the phenomenom of 'selective advantage' for heterozygous traits where a defective allele for a gene (when paired with a healthy one) will present a biological advantage to a creature who has it.

A good example to use is the malaria/anemia example which is found in tropical races in malaria-rich environments:

A = healthy allele, a = defective allele

AA = healthy person => gets malaria
Aa = carrier for the mutant gene => doesn't get malaria => is perfectly healthy
aa = sickle cell anemia => doesn't get malaria

Defective genes can serve a purpose. The 'healthy' and 'anemic' people lose out because they are victims of one disease of the other. However, the heterozygous one will be immune to both diseases.

And to answer your statement on why we don't let technology do all the work, I will remind you that we are still biological organisms and depend on our biology to keep the species alive and a species kept together by spare parts is doomed to extinction. Although a bunch of cyborgs and AI's straight out of Ghost in the Shell doesnt bother me, diversity is the key to survival so we will have to keep the DNA fresh and diversified if we want to stay a healthy species. Hell, a solar flare could disrupt all of the electrical systems on Earth and kill all the cyborgs, and a disease could wipe out all humans. Diversification is the key to survival. Don't give up on flesh and blood just yet :)

...I will remind you that we are still biological organisms and depend on our biology to keep the species alive and a species kept together by spare parts is doomed to extinction.

All species are doomed to eventual extinction. It's just a question of when.

There is no need to outgrow war.
War speeds progress and makes the generations a couple centuries later better off for it.
Consider these innovations:

Flight. Though originally developed in peace, planes first recieved international attention with WW2.
Iron (and various and sundry metallurgy bits). Originally developed to make better weapons and armor.
Atomic Power. The first and primary use of the power of the atom was the Nuclear Weapon (Further, Japan has especially benefitted from this. Despite being bombed, almost all of there power is nuclear).
HMVs. Yes, it is indeed the stupidest thing to hit the roads, but people like it anyway and it was created for war.

There are others, but I'm too lazy to go on. However, this does prove my point.
War is neccessary because the fires of human evolution have all but died out, and war is one of the few instances that actually forces nations into a kill or be killed scenario which leads to growth and development.

Then we have genetic research. What will that create for the future? GATTACA?

Gundam SEED follows a plot based upon a portion of people having become genetically altered (Coordinators) to improve their strength and intelligence - while the scientist who had discovered genetic modification had hoped it would unite humanity, it did just the opposite, and then a rather large war broke out.

Snip
Speciating the result of a species that is somehow isolated from members of its own species and is allowed evolve differently to better suit their environment. But I can now see what you’re saying about speeding up evolution. Each branch has not quite speciated yet and is still able to interbreed, bringing in new genetic information which can be beneficial, or at times a nuisance. Like getting sickle cell. It might be all fine and dandy in areas where there’s malaria, but in areas where there is no malaria sickle cell can spread in an area where it’s beneficial affects aren’t needed while at the same time still getting the negative affects.

Yes we are constantly evolving. But technology is actually helping microorganisms evolve faster. We keep trying to find new ways of combating them with technology. They start becoming resistant and evolve so that we need to find a new way to combat them. Then they evolve again and we have to find a new way to combat them. And I’m not quite sure if our bodies can keep up.

Anyways, we are getting a bit off topic here.

1. Letila is a guy.
2. Hell no; should be reserved for fantasy books.
1. Sorry, just Letila sounded like quite a feminine name.

2. I agree with this. The anarcho-communist ideal sounds like paradise, I don't think it's attainible with humans currently the way they are.