Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
The war against the Native Americans and the English could be narrowed down to a society fighting for the abundant resources available in North America, I believe. To even suggest that the millions who suffered and died for that acquisition of resources was because of religious beliefs...
Ozen, if you wish to believe it's all so simplistic as "one-cause wars", then go right ahead.
Saying that war is essentially fighting over resources is a generalization. It does not suggest one-cause.
I've selected an entire continent including all known history of it. I haven't ignored any wars or relevant statistics for the know history of North America. If you'd like to list more information please do so.
Not only is North America large in scale, it is know for being a rather violent, and the only 'superpower' today. I would think this would make it a subject for evidence.
You did? Where did you discuss the wars between various Indian tribes...particularly, for example, the constant invasion of the Indian pubelos by the Plains Indians?
That was the first thing I listed:
Did Native American's war over religious beliefs? I don't know but I suspect not.
Granted I should have said that I mean to include all know history of North America.
Did the Native American's of the Plains invaded the Pubelos because of religious beliefs?
I think just the multiple cause idea means that we can't solely blame religion. But it is certainly one cause. War comes not only from the top. There are already many americans that fear their country is becoming islamized. This affects the way people think about each war. The whole nation is at war aside from some peaceful protesters. Imagine if america lost the war with Iraq? People dreadfully fear that.
See also: Prehistoric weapons It is hypothesized that in the earliest hunter-gatherer societies of Homo erectus, population density was probably low enough to avoid armed conflict. The development of the throwing-spear, together with ambush hunting techniques, made potential violence between groups very costly, dictating conflict avoidence, groups moving apart as far as possible to alleviate resource competition. This behaviour would have facilitated the migration out of Africa of H. erectus some 1.8 million years ago as a natural consequence of conflict avoidance. This period of "Paleolithic warlessness" would then have persisted until well after the appearance of Homo sapiens some 0.2 million years ago, and probably ended only with a shift in societal organization in the Upper Paleolithic. At this stage, the mobilization of all male group members in a raiding party (as opposed to a hunting party) for the purpose of dawn raids on another group's sleeping quarters shifts the tactical advantage from defenders to attackers, capitalizing on the advantages of surprise and numerical superiority. Of the many cave paintings from the Upper Paleolithic, none depict people attacking other people. There is no known archaeological evidence of large scale fighting until well into the Aurignacian.[3][4]
Thought this might add to the debate. The African Bushmen are a surviving hunter gatherer society with very low levels of violence. It seems as if wars are competitions for resources, and societies which don't possess resources don't have any reason to fight for them.
0
personDon't believe everything you thinkThe liminal spaceVeteran
There's a multiple series episode of South Park where Cartman gets transported to the future. There is no more religion but there are 3 seperate factions at war. Instead of saying God damn they say Science damn, essentially science has just become another dogma worth fighting over, each group believing in the truth of their own version. People will cling to anything.
Instead of saying God damn they say Science damn, essentially science has just become another dogma worth fighting over, each group believing in the truth of their own version.
THAT is hilarious!
So often the greater truths of life are found in South Park and The Onion
So maybe religion isn't a cause but more of a reinforcer.
Yes, I think it often is like that, particularly with organised religions which get tied up with state and politics. Each side claims to have God on their side, and this fiction is encouraged by the clerical hierarchies who have a vested interest.
But isn't a religion that allows itself to be used as an excuse ethically very weak and dubious?
I'm pretty sure that over history the number of people killed by Buddhists is miniscule compared to the numbers killed by adherents of the Abrahamic faiths.
You have attributed a 'self' to religion.
Your second paragraph makes the point of who is actually carrying out the killings.
I've selected an entire continent including all known history of it. I haven't ignored any wars or relevant statistics for the know history of North America. If you'd like to list more information please do so.
Not only is North America large in scale, it is know for being a rather violent, and the only 'superpower' today. I would think this would make it a subject for evidence.
Sorry, i meant by selecting only one continent, you have cherry picked. Include the whole world as your sample and the picture may be different. What do you mean by 'a subject for evidence'?
There's a multiple series episode of South Park where Cartman gets transported to the future...
Remember that episode. Any episode involving Cartman is awesome.
It seems to me that most wars are fought over territory, and the resources they contain.
As has been suggested it's often a complicated picture. Take the Israel/Palestine conflict. It could be said the war is just about territory. This would ignore the fact that Zionists will not negotiate any peace if their demands for the territory promised to them by god in a two thousand year old book are not met. Religion has got involved.
I've selected an entire continent including all known history of it. I haven't ignored any wars or relevant statistics for the know history of North America. If you'd like to list more information please do so.
Not only is North America large in scale, it is know for being a rather violent, and the only 'superpower' today. I would think this would make it a subject for evidence.
Sorry, i meant by selecting only one continent, you have cherry picked. Include the whole world as your sample and the picture may be different. What do you mean by 'a subject for evidence'?
No you're right, North America is anecdotal evidence that religions does not cause violence. It merely proves the largest nations in the world can have terribly violent wars and have tens of thousands of violent deaths annually, all not due to religious beliefs but for other reasons.
Comments
Did the Native American's of the Plains invaded the Pubelos because of religious beliefs?
Thought this might add to the debate. The African Bushmen are a surviving hunter gatherer society with very low levels of violence. It seems as if wars are competitions for resources, and societies which don't possess resources don't have any reason to fight for them.
So often the greater truths of life are found in South Park and The Onion