1. Summary
This page introduces the views of various theories about the causes of war.
Historians) Historians say that there are some conditions and situations for the outbreak of war, but it is not a system that tells when war will occur or where it will occur. However, social scientists criticize historians in that the war is not an accident, contrary to what historian AJP Taylor claims, and that some leaders make conscious decisions to make war.
Psychological theories) Psychologists say that war is outbreaks because men are originally violent. According to this theory, men's violence is usually suppressed and resolved by war. Contradicting the claim that there can not be a peaceful era in which war does not occur if war is caused by male violence, They say it is not really a peaceful time, but a time to prepare for war.
Anthropological theories) Anthropologists say that war does not occur naturally but takes place by nurturing. According to their theory, human society nurtures humans to fight. So war does not occur if human society changes.
Sociological theories) Sociological theories have long wondered why war broke out, but many of the things they gained through research were contradictory. What is noteworthy in their study of war is that war does not take place through any one independent variable but through a variety of complex variables.
Information theories) Information theory says that war is taking place because of the lack of information on war. For example, if there was information about how the defeated nations would get out of the war and how much they would suffer, then the war did not take place and the nations defeated in the war would have chosen to surrender without fighting.
Economic theories) This theory sees war as occurring for economic reasons such as creating new markets, seeking natural resources and wealth.
Marxist theories) The theory explains that all wars are caused by struggles of the class struggle. This page already outlines the war perspective of Marxist theory so I cite this page. "It sees wars as imperial ventures to enhance the power of the ruling class and divide the proletariat of the world by pitting them against each other for contrived ideals such as nationalism or religion. Further, wars are a natural outgrowth of the free market and class system, and will not disappear until the world revolution occurs."
2. Interesting
It was very interesting, from the viewpoint of the information theory, that the defeated countries would have surrendered without fighting if there was information that could be inferred how many of them would have been lost. As I played a game called "Romance of the Three Kingdoms" in the past, I was wondering that why do not counterparts surrender to me as my country's troops are so stronger than counterparts, if the two nations are to fight, it seemed that the other side would suffer enormous damage! In looking at information theory, I thought that if the other country knew enough about me, the other country would surrender to me, which was a very interesting imagination.
3. Discussion
Information theory argues that if a war-defeated country had previously known the information of a victorious country, it would have chosen surrender without a war. But I wonder if they are fighting because there is not enough information. In the game of Romance of the Three Kingdoms mentioned above, there was a function to know how much the opponent had troops by examining the opponent's country. I had the idea that the reason they did not surrender is not because of lack of information, but because of their cause to pursue as I imagined what I was doing above. Sometimes people live to achieve what they seek, even if they are a little less rational. Maybe it was why they did not surrender to me?
This page introduces the views of various theories about the causes of war.
Historians) Historians say that there are some conditions and situations for the outbreak of war, but it is not a system that tells when war will occur or where it will occur. However, social scientists criticize historians in that the war is not an accident, contrary to what historian AJP Taylor claims, and that some leaders make conscious decisions to make war.
Psychological theories) Psychologists say that war is outbreaks because men are originally violent. According to this theory, men's violence is usually suppressed and resolved by war. Contradicting the claim that there can not be a peaceful era in which war does not occur if war is caused by male violence, They say it is not really a peaceful time, but a time to prepare for war.
Anthropological theories) Anthropologists say that war does not occur naturally but takes place by nurturing. According to their theory, human society nurtures humans to fight. So war does not occur if human society changes.
Sociological theories) Sociological theories have long wondered why war broke out, but many of the things they gained through research were contradictory. What is noteworthy in their study of war is that war does not take place through any one independent variable but through a variety of complex variables.
Information theories) Information theory says that war is taking place because of the lack of information on war. For example, if there was information about how the defeated nations would get out of the war and how much they would suffer, then the war did not take place and the nations defeated in the war would have chosen to surrender without fighting.
Economic theories) This theory sees war as occurring for economic reasons such as creating new markets, seeking natural resources and wealth.
Marxist theories) The theory explains that all wars are caused by struggles of the class struggle. This page already outlines the war perspective of Marxist theory so I cite this page. "It sees wars as imperial ventures to enhance the power of the ruling class and divide the proletariat of the world by pitting them against each other for contrived ideals such as nationalism or religion. Further, wars are a natural outgrowth of the free market and class system, and will not disappear until the world revolution occurs."
2. Interesting
It was very interesting, from the viewpoint of the information theory, that the defeated countries would have surrendered without fighting if there was information that could be inferred how many of them would have been lost. As I played a game called "Romance of the Three Kingdoms" in the past, I was wondering that why do not counterparts surrender to me as my country's troops are so stronger than counterparts, if the two nations are to fight, it seemed that the other side would suffer enormous damage! In looking at information theory, I thought that if the other country knew enough about me, the other country would surrender to me, which was a very interesting imagination.
3. Discussion
 |
| Romance of the Three Kingdoms 13 pk http://sports.news.naver.com/esports/news/read.nhn?oid=442&aid=0000061922 |
Information theory argues that if a war-defeated country had previously known the information of a victorious country, it would have chosen surrender without a war. But I wonder if they are fighting because there is not enough information. In the game of Romance of the Three Kingdoms mentioned above, there was a function to know how much the opponent had troops by examining the opponent's country. I had the idea that the reason they did not surrender is not because of lack of information, but because of their cause to pursue as I imagined what I was doing above. Sometimes people live to achieve what they seek, even if they are a little less rational. Maybe it was why they did not surrender to me?
ReplyDeleteOf your thirds stories, the story of human rationality was very impressive to me.
Man is a rational animal pursuing rationality.
But at the same time, it is an ideal animal pursuing irrationality.
We do not know whether to make efficient choices or to make effective choices, and this is why we are attracted to sociology because sociology is a collective of these human beings.