Fearon's Argumentative Analysis

805 Words2 Pages

“Fearon on this article, attempts to provide a clear statement of what a rationalist explanation for war is, and to characterize the full set of rationalist explanations that are both theoretically coherent and empirically plausible. “Page 380”. Fearon in his attempt to convince the audience about his assumptions and argument regarding war, he used the following terms: Anarchy, human expectations and gains at the aftermath of the war, nations unwillingness to reach certain treaties and agreement, human’s often under estimation and over estimation and miscalculation of the military might of the opponents are all factors contributing to the emergence of world clash. The strength of the theoretical argument presented by Fearon was his used of world leaders as perpetrators of the world conflict, they wage wars wherein they never physically and personally pay a price but the good number of victims are the military, citizens and tax payers that suffer …show more content…

Very nice argument, but what is it that may tempt these rational leaders to be involved in these wars was not very explanatory. Upon all the given arguments by the author, no mentioned was made as to what is it that may prevent these rational leaders from utilizing diplomacy or whatever means of communications to avoid such costly, misguided, miscalculated wars often fought and constantly keeping our planet under national emergency everywhere you go. Great article and great arguments that lack supplication of materials needed to put the world under one umbrella where nations will stand up for each other and no against each other. Some solutions to avoid wars, were very minimal in the article but nonetheless, a very powerful and insightful

Open Document