Is War perfectly natural?

page: 1
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 12:27 AM
link   
Is War perfectly natural im nature?
Consider a ant colony migrating to a new area to set up anew nest. If they comes across another colony in the territory of interest a war will incur , and the winner will be the reigner over the terrritory.
Its not just ants it will happen with any species which is fighting for use of the limited resources in area of living; where both are in close physical proximity to eachother and the resources needed to survive.

If War is perfectly natural and then why resist it?
Should we recognise its an inevitable part of our existance in a world where resources are limited?
edit on 12-10-2012 by AthlonSavage because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 12:36 AM
link   
reply to post by AthlonSavage
 


Of course war is natural. But some call it conflict, opposing dynamics, etc. It doesn't always have to be the result of bombs and bullets.

For instance, I love the war between the sexes. Though I am not really looking for a adversary to conquer, but rather a ally I can count on. (In that case, diplomacy rules...
if you don't want to sleep on the couch.)

I think I get where you're coming from regading this post.
edit on 12-10-2012 by TDawgRex because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 12:38 AM
link   
reply to post by AthlonSavage
 


great question however we aspire to be better than our primal natural mechanisms...that consequently we find suffering in...I'm not sure if an ant suffers...we are obviously very similar and very different than our surrounding biological world. We are capable and because of that capability there in lies an idea of responsibility for that capability.

We can claim the natural world is at work when we do anything really...rape, murder, theft, etc...can all be attributed to primal natural mechanisms in the biological world...does that make it so easily dismissed though?

If you are going to try and account for the natural world and use it as justification for war...you must also account for the natural feelings that inspire for peace...and use that as justification for no war...

great philosophical question!
edit on 12-10-2012 by Sly1one because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 12:42 AM
link   
People fight. People fight over opinions, morals, ideals, ethics, feelings, passion, resources, social issues...what people really fight for is *control*.

You have a united unit of people who give, willingly or unwillingly, these sources to a few as a representation of themselves, you will undoubtedly have fights between the opposing representation. This equates to war.

I suppose it is natural enough.

A peaceful world is a sparkle in the night sky. We can see it, one day we might reach it if we put enough thought and energy into it, but realistically, it's light years away.



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 12:43 AM
link   
reply to post by AthlonSavage
 


Ants do not have a war since they have no body politic. Animals are naturally anarchistic (meaning to lack a hierarchy) as even the queen only serves the special role of birthing for the colony. She has no particular ability to command or rule.

The ants you see are simply engaging in a territory dispute for energy resources, but ants are not looking to corner the market or establish an empire. To assume any more than simply looking for something to eat is anthropomorphizing.

Humans engaged in a war has more to do with receiving commands for self-serving interests. That is the spoils of war only help a particular handful while the larger group does not gain anything.



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 12:51 AM
link   
Absolutely not.

Many of the so called "wars" we see today arent even wars, they are nothing more than thuggery and stealing but on a national level.

Conflict, fighting, violence, none of this is "natural". Its a poor excuse for those who arent intelligent enough to resolve conflicts peaceably.

edit on 12-10-2012 by gladtobehere because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 02:05 AM
link   
It is only natural in a world that as been hypnotized to believe that i don't love all of you.
The only thing perfectly natural is creation and we are lacking in disclosure in that area.



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 02:11 AM
link   
Its funny how love quickely got mentioned. Is love and war different faces of same coin. Does a woman torture a man using his love for her because she knows she can. Is this a warriors way?
edit on 12-10-2012 by AthlonSavage because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 02:18 AM
link   
Is war natural ??

Certainly conflict does seem to have an evolutionary imperative in nature i.e males fighting to be the dominant individual therefore favouring the stronger/superior will mate with the fittest female and produce the best offspring.
Conflict in nature whether for resources or dominance does appear to be a mechanism whereby the strongest survive.

In human terms it all depends how you define natural.In terms of 'human nature' or in accordance with 'nature' as a whole.And if we are a product of the natural world does it therefore follow we should be subject to natural law or try to rise above it.

I think war is part of human nature but we can rise above it as shown by our general reluctance to resort to war,or glory in it like we used to.For example,look at the joy that majority showed at the outbreak of WWI,that would be unthinkable now (i'm talking of the general populace,governments and 'elites' may have a very different attittde then and now).

I think it there's a faint glimmer of hope for mankind,faint but there.



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 02:18 AM
link   

Is War perfectly natural?


My answer is NO! We as a species (human) dont have the ability to use common sense for both war and evolution (not in the sense you may think). We only want to survive, but when we see something weaker we tend to want to destroy it.

Not because its weaker, but because we can eliminate it. Natural selection is a real thing.

Peace, NRE.



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 02:21 AM
link   
reply to post by NoRegretsEver
 


Sounds like an easy explanation say everything can be explained as a survival instinct. The easiest way from point A to B is the straightline answer.



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 02:24 AM
link   
reply to post by AthlonSavage
 


I would say that hate is on the other side of the proverbial coin.
Everything else is just trying to influence an inevitable outcome of the one sided coin being an illusion used to teach and pacify us through time.



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 02:24 AM
link   
if we weren't intelligent enough to be aware of it's ramifications it would happen naturally

war is now more like armed robbery.



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 02:26 AM
link   
reply to post by AthlonSavage
 


Actually.. yes. We have ego, which in turn makes us into something that we normally wont to be, especially in a group.

That is the importance of teaching. Lets say that you taught a group of 5 people that full agree and understand your stance, would you want that to continue?

Of course you would as most of us, except that most of us are not psychopaths, and dont have the ability to cause war.

Peace, NRE.



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 02:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by NoRegretsEver

Is War perfectly natural?



My answer is NO! We as a species (human) dont have the ability to use common sense for both war and evolution (not in the sense you may think). We only want to survive, but when we see something weaker we tend to want

Not because its weaker, but because we can eliminate it. Natural selection is a real thing.



Neither do animals kill or sideline the weak with any concious notion of evolution,they don't choose natural selection over other processes through a concious decision.

Neither would I argue that humans ever have or do now.

War is usually a result of selfish greed,cultural dominance,cultural,national survival or 'moral' right which you don't find in natur
edit on 12/10/12 by fastbob72 because: seperating quote and reply
m
edit on 12/10/12 by fastbob72 because: hopefully got quote sorted now ;-)



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 02:46 AM
link   

Neither do animals kill or sideline the weak with any concious notion of evolution,they don't choose natural selection over other processes through a concious decision.


We underestimate animals as most see them as inferior creatures. If they did not consciously kill in order to survive then there would be way more videos of mice eating bears.

Peace, NRE.



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 03:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by NoRegretsEver

Neither do animals kill or sideline the weak with any concious notion of evolution,they don't choose natural selection over other processes through a concious decision.


We underestimate animals as most see them as inferior creatures. If they did not consciously kill in order to survive then there would be way more videos of mice eating bears.

Peace, NRE.



Haha,i think you've missed my point or I've failed to explain what I meant properly - probably the latter.
Of course animals conciously kill in order to survive that would seem to be obvious,what I was trying to say was that it IS out of need to survive and not a concious belief in or attempt to steer evolution.

In most cases throughout history war hasnt been down to a simple,straightforward necessity to survive (Incas vs Conquistadors may be an exception from an Inca perspective).



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 03:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by AthlonSavage
If War is perfectly natural and then why resist it?

Just because something is natural doesn't mean we should just let it happen. Rape is also completely natural, so do you think we should go ahead and legalize that? C'mon man...
edit on 12-10-2012 by Xaphan because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 03:16 AM
link   

In most cases throughout history war hasnt been down to a simple,straightforward necessity to survive (Incas vs Conquistadors may be an exception from an Inca perspective).


Im sorry if I misunderstood as well. War has always been straight forward, and a necessity to survive, we just have to think about those that cause them, and what their intent is, most people as a society fail to look into it.

We have been taught since the very beginning that the winners choose fate, and we live for that in a sense. If every story told us that there were winners and loser, and it was 50/50 people would less likely choose war.

Btw not trying to be difficult I am enjoying the discussion.
Peace, NRE.



posted on Oct, 12 2012 @ 03:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Xaphan
 


Im sorry but how did you come to that conclusion?

Peace, NRE.





top topics
 
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join