More handpicked essays just for you.
Importance of Realism to the study of international politics
Biology chapter 13 the theory of evolution
The evolution of evolutionary theory essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
In Thayer’s article, he makes an attempt to incorporate Darwin’s Evolutionary Theory into the international security studies. The article tries to answer a central question that what are the implications of Evolutionary theory to realist theory of international security and in what way can peace be achieved if warfare is part of human nature? This paper agrees with Thayer that Evolutionary theory provides a scientific theory foundation for realism and is an ultimate cause for war and ethnic conflicts, as well as the assumption that origin of war is intrinsic in human nature as part of their evolution history. This paper will also suggest that a balanced structure of the world could contribute to temporary peace. But it need to be noted that the theory is also limited since Evolution theory could not fully explain many other forms of security problems like civil wars and terrorism. To review Thayer’s article, first, the paper will briefly explain how Evolutionary theory act as an ultimate cause for realist theory in terms of two human traits: egoism and domination. Following that, the paper will discuss the implications of Evolutionary theory to international relations. This paper will also evaluate the theory by comparing it with Waltz’s and Gleditsch’s theory on peace and war. Finally, it will conclude the paper by summarizing main points.
Thayer seeks to understand Evolutionary theory as the ultimate cause of realism. In Evolutionary theory, humans like other animals have to evolve to survive and reproduce from natural selection, which develops two basic human traits: egoism and dominance (Thayer, 2000, p.130). In order to survive and for fitness, an organism tends to places its security over the others and according to Evoluti...
... middle of paper ...
...dens the understanding of international relations and correspondingly broadens the understanding of security. Built on Thayer’s and Waltz’s theory, the paper suggests that structure of the international system is central to international security and to achieve peace, suitable strategies are necessary to balance the power relations. While it should not be ignored that the Evolution theory still falls within realism realm with many other forms of complex security problems unexplained.
Reference:
Gleditsch, N. P. (1999). Peace and democracy. Encyclopedia of Violence,
Peace and Conflict, 2, 643-652.
Thayer, B. A. (2000). Bring to darwin: evolutionary theory, realism and
international relations. International Security, 25(2), 124-151.
Waltz, K. N. (1988). The origins of war in neorealist theory. Journal of
Interdisciplinary History, XVIII(4), 615-628.
Hobbes, as one of the early political philosophers, believes human has the nature to acquire “power after power” and has three fundamental interests which are safety, “conjugal affections”, and riches for commodious lives. (Hobbes, p108, p191) From this basis, Hobbes deducts that in a state of nature, human tends to fight against each other (state of war) to secure more resources (Hobbes,
Anyone with even a moderate background in science has heard of Charles Darwin and his theory of evolution. Since the publishing of his book On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection in 1859, Darwin’s ideas have been debated by everyone from scientists to theologians to ordinary lay-people. Today, though there is still severe opposition, evolution is regarded as fact by most of the scientific community and Darwin’s book remains one of the most influential ever written.
Wendt, Alexander. “Constructing International Politics.” International Security. Cambridge: President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1995. 71-81. Print.
Evolutionary Psychology has been controversial since its rise in the 1990s, with critics and proponents debating its merits as a science. While critics (e.g. David Buller, Elizabeth Lloyd) have extensively criticized the fundamentals of Evolutionary Psychology, few philosophers or scientists have challenged them. Given the growing influence of the evolutionary behavioral sciences within mainstream science like Psychology and Anthropology, it is important analyze the critiques and see if the arguments against Evolutionary Psychology have merit. This paper will focus on two of the most often cited critiques of Evolutionary Psychology: the critique of the concept of the modular model of the mind and the critique of the two “signature achievements” in Evolutionary Psychology, Martin Daly and Margot Wilson’s Cinderella Effect and David Buss’s studies of male-female differences in jealousy. I will describe and respond these critiques of Evolutionary Psychology, making the case that these critiques are not valid and have little merit on scientific basis of Evolutionary Psychology.
To conclude, indeed there are veracities in Waltz arguments, but also there are limitations which cannot totally explain how the international system interacts with actors from different levels. The features of the world after the Cold War do not resemble what the world is today. Phenomenon such as integration, interdependence among states and the creation of international instruments are the result of states' behavior which are constantly shaping the world politics. Therefore, one theoretical ideology by itself will not fully explain the progressive changes in the international system, taking into account that states do influence in the international system.
The purpose of this academic piece is to critically discuss The Darwinist implication of the evolutionary psychological conception of human nature. Charles Darwin’s “natural selection” will be the main factor discussed as the theory of evolution was developed by him. Evolutionary psychology is the approach on human nature on the basis that human behavior is derived from biological factors and there are psychologists who claim that human behavior is not something one is born with but rather it is learned. According to Downes, S. M. (2010 fall edition) “Evolutionary psychology is one of the many biologically informed approaches to the study of human behavior”. This goes further to implicate that evolutionary psychology is virtually based on the claims of the human being a machine that can be programmed to do certain things and because it can be programmed it has systems in the body that allow such to happen for instance the nervous system which is the connection of the spinal cord and the brain and assists in voluntary and involuntary motor movements.
Long debates outlined two confronting approaches, of traditionalists and wideners, first adherents of the realist school of thought, define security as a freedom from any objective military threat and security studies is defined, for example, by Stephen Walt as “the studies of the threat, use, and control of military force”. Tradi...
Evolutionary theory throws humans into a tizzy. Driven by the need to amass knowledge, we find ourselves surging forward into the exploration of a story where the more we know, the less we can feature ourselves. Eminent evolutionary biologist Ernst Mayr contends that anthropocentrism and belief in evolution by natural selection are mutually exclusive (Mayr 1972). In other words, the Darwinian story of biological evolution rejects the notion of progress and replaces it with directionless change, thereby subverting the conception of human superiority on a biological scale toward perfection. Evolution by natural selection undermines the idea that humans are the culmination and ultimate beneficiaries of all nature. However, to say that anthropocentrism necessarily dissolves in the rising tide of evolutionary theory is to ignore the ways in which human centered humanness plays an intriguing role in evolution.
The efforts to find new concepts and theories of security are the response to the changes in the international system after the end of the cold war. During the cold war era was the world divided into three, first the western democracies, second the communist USSR and the third world country that consist of other developing countries. According to Klauss Knorr in his book “National Security Studies: Scope and Structure of the field, traditional National security studies during the cold war were mainly based on military issues and their relation to economic, technological, political factors within the “national framework”; and the nature and distribution of power-military power, that is-, and the use of these force among other issues at the international level. This we can see from United States National Security Policy, instead of maintaining a large standing force, Truman favored mobilization of reserve forces in the traditional American fashion of “declare and then prepare” for war. Despite claiming global role for America, the national security strategy exploited only one aspect of the military as a national instrument of power, one the US ended up not being able to
Though many people do not believe that war is right for any occasion, there are those who believe in the “just war” principles. Just war is a principle where it “seeks to transform war and peace into moral questions, to move international relations beyond the ‘realist’ concept” (Just War 1). From a realist point of view, war is normal between civilizations if there are irreconcilable national interests or polices that threaten peace of the world. However, the views of “just war” supporters differs from realist supporters. Supporters for “just war” have the belief that war is justifiable if it helps limits the destruction of war in an area.
...e power with which powerful states can rule the weak preserving their status as a regional and global hegemony. Finally, it is incorporated the democratic system. Although debatable for some people, democracy serves to spread the altruistic and moralistic rhetoric of a free and peaceful world. Additionally, Western states do not hesitate about the rice of new powerful nations or the threats of the mass destruction weapons, they are constantly monitoring their menaces and evaluating what is the most accurate strategy to maintain at least the status quo in this respect. The Western states need the realist approach in order to be well prepared to cope with any threat. In a final conclusion, all of these reasons have been assimilated by Western states in order to restructure a strategic doctrines with the purposes of counteract any possible threat before they emerge.
Once the reluctant revolutionary, Charles Darwin, published his scientific findings in his book, On the Origin of Species, he forever changed and for centuries later shaped the world we live in. One of Darwin’s theories, supported by a large amount of evidence, which he published in this book, was that humans, along with all other living species, over time, are subject to evolve and change. This theory would later give birth to an entire new field, evolutionary psychology. Today, evolutionary psychology is an emerging, and still growing, field. Darwin’s evolutionary theory provided the framework to develop a new perspective, and thus field, in psychology. By applying Darwin’s approach and theories to psychology, we have created a new way at looking at the evolution of humanity and human behavior
Today’s world subjects an individual to many different socio-religious-political influences. Out of those individuals come idealized leaders reinforcing their influences. In the increasing complexity of such memes and their interactions clarity and an understanding of evolutionary paths that is favored by nature-one that results in better survival- has become paramount. An assumption can boldly be made that violent or non violent constituents in the practice of such ideals eventually determine the desirable outcome namely the survival and success in the pursuit.
All living things need the resources provided by our natural world to live, leading to them adapting to specific environments. Animals in particular are mobile creatures that move from place to place searching for the best environments for their survival. The most intelligent creatures in our animal world are human beings and like other animals, they moved from place to place while organized into races in search of the elusive desirable environments. However, there is always the likelihood of finding fellow humanity already thriving in that environment. This resulted to conflict as competition for the inadequate resources arose. Consequently, human beings formed nations, allegiance to the national system meant loyalty to the governance, and regions and they formed military groups to defend their resources. However, the military warfare has changed with international understanding, though the idea still rests heavily on fight for resources. Further, international politics illustrates the causes and effects of modern military war have changed due to chan...
Realism prioritizes national interest and security over ideology, moral concerns and social reconstructions. Realists arrived at basic condition of anarchy because there are no general measures which all countries can utilize to guide their conduct (Donnelly,2000). But, a state must constantly be alert of the activities of the states around it and use a realistic approach to resolve the problems. The development of modern warfare and depletion of resources also consolidate the fundamentals of realism. The realists reached this theory by making various assumptions (Richard,1981). They assume that international system is in a steady state of disorder. There is no actor higher than the states that is able of controlling their relations; states must maintain their associations with other states by themselves. Realists suppose that states must endeavour to conquer as many resources as achievable for their national security. Realists believe that interactions between states are decided by their might based on their militaries and financial strength. Further, assumption that there is a common distrust of long-standing collaboration or coalition leads to their fundamental political condition of Anarchy.