1. Summary
The majority of people do not want war. Nevertheless, the war is happening somewhere in the earth at this moment. Many academic representatives attempted to explain why war is taking place.
Historians are reluctant to believe that all war was caused by a thorough causal relationship. They claim that war tends to happen accidentally like a traffic accident. Some psychologists argue that men are essentially violent, and that the tendency of violence is suppressed in society, but expressed through war. This argument is taken up by feminism and says that if human leadership is to women, there will be no war. Similarly, there are scholars who claim that wars only occur when mentally disproportionate men control the state. In evolutionary psychology, war is seen as a continuation of the struggle of the animal sphere, which is a natural phenomenon.
Anthropologists argue that war is not natural or accidental, but cultural and upbringing. Therefore, they believe that if human society can be reformed, war will disappear. In sociology, there are two main divisions: claims that are caused by internal economic, social, and political conditions, and claims that are the cause of international conflict, secret treaties, and balance of power.
The emerging theory is information theory. The theory developed by international relations scholars is that all wars are caused by a lack of information. If both sides of the war know all the information, the loser will give up and avoid the cost of defeat that the war will bring. But not telling everything is a standard tactical component of the warring parties. Marxist theory is that all wars have come from class war.
2. Interesting Point
The most interesting theory among the various theories to explain the cause of war is information theory. If the warring parties know all the information, the country that will become the loser will never fight. But I think this is an outcome approach. I want to criticize information theory for two reasons. The first is that there are innumerable variables in the war. Taking StarCraft as an example, the control of individual units has a big influence beyond merely fighting troops. Also, there is an unexpected variable between the soldiers and the crowding phenomenon. In other words, even assuming that you know the opponent's military strength, I think that the first limitation of information theory is that you can not figure out the various variables that occur in it. Second, information theory is excellent in explaining past wars, but it can not predict future wars. By analyzing past wars, information theory can provide an excellent indication of where the defeated country is lacking information. However, the countries in which the signs of war are currently appearing will hide information thoroughly, and it is almost impossible for scholars of information theory to find out.
3. Discussion Point
As I said at Interesting Point, I still think that the theory that explains the cause of war is best suited to information theory. We have seen in this article the theory of explaining the causes of war. What is the most appropriate theory you think?
The most appropriate theory I think is economic theory. The reason is that people basically want to have something that is greedy and scarce. The country is no exception. A nation with power takes a country's resources by fighting a weak nation to gain more capital and power.
ReplyDelete