Margaret Mead Warfare
In Warfare: An Invention- Not a Biological Necessity, Margaret Mead states that war is a creation of man, not a necessity we need in order to thrive. She begins by stating that those who believe war is a biological necessity see men as aggressive by nature. This natural aggression leads men to need an outlet for their frustration which, in this case, is war. She proceeds to suggest that war is a creation of society. The origins of war, such as the struggle for land and natural resources, are not man’s nature, they are the nature of the society and history. Lastly, Mead points out that war is inevitable until we change our social system and our desire for power and possessions. If this change of system is successful, “warfare would disappear,
…show more content…
This lack of warfare is most evident among the Eskimos. Despite their rightful cause to engage in warfare, the Eskimos do not comprehend war. Eskimos are not passive people, even though they do not resort to warfare. These people are faced with “[f]ights, theft of wives, murder, cannibalism” (Mead 502). Even with the circumstances listed above, which drive men to desperation, warfare is not present. Granted, though the Eskimos refrain from the act of war; they do release their aggressions in the way of murder. An Eskimo may enter a new village and fight the strongest man to establish his place in this settlement. This strain of power, albeit aggressive, is an act of strength, not …show more content…
“If people have the idea of going to war and the idea that war is the way in which certain situations, defined within their society, are to be handled, they will sometimes go to war” (Mead 503). This proves that if the idea of war is implemented by a society and engraved in the minds of the citizens, the people will see war as necessary. A prime example of this is that of the Andaman’s. This low-level society, which participated in hunting and gathering traditions, lived simpler than the Eskimos. Even with this lack of sophistication, the Andaman people knew about warfare. This society had an army of only fifteen people, yet they still battled in war. The underdeveloped Andaman society demonstrates that war is an invention of society. The Andaman people knew very little and still they engaged in war because it was an idea that was etched into their head by their
This lack of warfare is most evident among the Eskimos. Despite their rightful cause to engage in warfare, the Eskimos do not comprehend war. Eskimos are not passive people, even though they do not resort to warfare. These people are faced with “[f]ights, theft of wives, murder, cannibalism” (Mead 502). Even with the circumstances listed above, which drive men to desperation, warfare is not present. Granted, though the Eskimos refrain from the act of war; they do release their aggressions in the way of murder. An Eskimo may enter a new village and fight the strongest man to establish his place in this settlement. This strain of power, albeit aggressive, is an act of strength, not …show more content…
“If people have the idea of going to war and the idea that war is the way in which certain situations, defined within their society, are to be handled, they will sometimes go to war” (Mead 503). This proves that if the idea of war is implemented by a society and engraved in the minds of the citizens, the people will see war as necessary. A prime example of this is that of the Andaman’s. This low-level society, which participated in hunting and gathering traditions, lived simpler than the Eskimos. Even with this lack of sophistication, the Andaman people knew about warfare. This society had an army of only fifteen people, yet they still battled in war. The underdeveloped Andaman society demonstrates that war is an invention of society. The Andaman people knew very little and still they engaged in war because it was an idea that was etched into their head by their