Take a photo of a barcode or cover
A review by valentinserrano
Beyond War: The Human Potential for Peace by Douglas P. Fry
4.0
Recommended by the renowned Robert Sapolsky, this essay is a fascinating read, particularly because it dismantles some of the ad hoc arguments of psychological-evolutionary reductionism (calling for greater caution from this hypothetical science) and serves as a counter-response to the biased opinions of Steven Pinker on the matter. Pinker himself admits to favoring his own perspective because he doesn’t want anyone to believe that a return to the past would be better, implicitly revealing his bias.
While Fry does not significantly expand our knowledge of hunter-gatherer societies (many essays have already tackled this topic), he does clarify key distinctions between different types of "primitive" societies, elaborates on forms of social aggression, and discusses certain methods of mediation. Although he is impeccable in demonstrating the "absence" of peace in gathering and tribal societies, his argument weakens when addressing the deeper roots of warfare in complex societies (ideologies, mass irrationalism, etc.).
In conclusion, this is an anthropological work well worth reading. Contrary to what some might argue, it avoids the error of ignoring that one homicide per 100 people is still a high number of deaths. In fact, what Fry avoids is the "ecological fallacy" that so many fall into (with Pinker being the most famous example), but not a devoted antropologists. The matter is more complex (and "incommensurable"). Just as you cannot equate a prisoner sentenced to life with a galley slave, suffering cannot be lightly quantified, either directly or indirectly. You cannot reduce the human factor to a mere number. Is the death of one hunter out of a hundred (due to adultery) comparable to the death of 10,000 soldiers in a country of one million (due to a war)? Further more, are the consequences, and subsequent suffering, truly similar?
While Fry does not significantly expand our knowledge of hunter-gatherer societies (many essays have already tackled this topic), he does clarify key distinctions between different types of "primitive" societies, elaborates on forms of social aggression, and discusses certain methods of mediation. Although he is impeccable in demonstrating the "absence" of peace in gathering and tribal societies, his argument weakens when addressing the deeper roots of warfare in complex societies (ideologies, mass irrationalism, etc.).
In conclusion, this is an anthropological work well worth reading. Contrary to what some might argue, it avoids the error of ignoring that one homicide per 100 people is still a high number of deaths. In fact, what Fry avoids is the "ecological fallacy" that so many fall into (with Pinker being the most famous example), but not a devoted antropologists. The matter is more complex (and "incommensurable"). Just as you cannot equate a prisoner sentenced to life with a galley slave, suffering cannot be lightly quantified, either directly or indirectly. You cannot reduce the human factor to a mere number. Is the death of one hunter out of a hundred (due to adultery) comparable to the death of 10,000 soldiers in a country of one million (due to a war)? Further more, are the consequences, and subsequent suffering, truly similar?