War is a complex social phenomenon. Various schools of theorists have studied the role of war in society. Its effects on human life are not only determinable, but they can also influence the way people think and act.
There are a number of reasons why war occurs. Among the factors are the political object, the means, and the feelings of the actors. A country can send forces to another country to prevent a crime or keep order. These are just a few examples of how war is used. Non-state actors also use military force and social influence to achieve their goals. However, these approaches are often separated.
The political object of war is the nation. The country must use all of its resources and capabilities to defend its interests and maintain its sovereignty. In addition to this, it must also accommodate itself to the nature of the means available. Some of these methods are technological, economic, psychological, and legal.
While many theories of war are based on psychological or innate factors, others assume that the acts of violence are a result of the natural drives of human beings. Psychologist John Bowlby suggests that a person’s innate drives for war and self-preservation are shaped by the social environment.
Other approaches, such as those of rationalists, assume that actors in a given situation are rational and therefore can be controlled. Rationalism has been used to explain why some countries engage in war and why others do not. But these assumptions are subject to criticism. For instance, they can be challenged on cost-benefit calculations.
Another approach, known as displacement theory, attempts to explain why people engage in violent activities. However, it does not fully explain how wars are triggered. Instead, it explains why people are inclined to hate other individuals.
Finally, some authors point out that a person’s feelings, such as anger and fear, can affect his ability to make decisions. This can lead to a disproportionate effect. However, this type of analysis is not always useful.
In a nutshell, the original motive for war is the most important consideration. As a means of achieving this, the art of war must be balanced against the need for courage. Although this may involve prudence, daring, and wisdom, the focus must remain on the original purpose of the act.
Because of the many ways in which war is studied, it is a subject that has been studied in all periods and ages. Contemporary theories divide into two major groups: Optimists and pessimists. Both groups of theorists have recognized the significance of war. Nevertheless, they have disagreed on how best to understand it.
Those who believe that war is a rational phenomenon usually have a strong normative element to their arguments. They argue that the object of war is the submission of the enemy to will. Thus, all of the means used to achieve this goal must be coherently executed.
According to this theory, the original motive for war is an antagonism between the interests of the parties involved. Often, the co-operation of allies is delayed until after the war begins. At this time, it is the interest of one commander to delay the resolution of the conflict, while the other wishes to hasten it.