Most wars are not fought over shortages of resources such as food and water, but rather over conquest, revenge, and ideology.
Interpretation
Wars are primarily driven by deeper human motivations rather than mere scarcity of resources.
Steven Pinker's quote emphasizes that the root causes of most wars lie in human emotions and ambitions, such as the desire for power, the need for retribution, and ideological convictions, rather than the physical lack of essential resources like food and water. This perspective challenges the conventional view that scarcity alone sparks conflicts, highlighting the complexities of human nature in the context of warfare.
In practice
In a debate on the causes of historical conflicts, this quote can help illustrate that wars are more complex than simple resource struggles.
The foundation of individual rights is the assumption that people have wants and needs and are authorities on what those wants and needs are. If people's stated desires were just some kind of erasable inscription or reprogrammable brainwashing, any atrocity could be justified.
The linguistic clumsiness of tourists and students might be the price we pay for the linguistic genius we displayed as babies, just as the decrepitude of age in the price we pay for the vigor of youth.
If we are not to abandon values such as peace and equality, or our commitments to science and truth, then we must pry these values away from claims about our psychological makeup that are vulnerable to being proven false.
We adults protect ourselves with laws, police, workplace regulations and social norms and there is no conceivable reason why children should be left more vulnerable, other that laziness or callousness in considering what life is like from their point of view.
The idea that children are passive repositories to be shaped by their parents has been massively overstated. A child's peer group is a far greater determinant of its development and achievements than parental aspiration.
Reason is non-negotiable. Try to argue against it, or to exclude it from some realm of knowledge, and you've already lost the argument, because you're using reason to make your case. ... We don't "believe" in reason.
A judgment about life has no meaning except the truth of the one who speaks last, and the mind is at ease only at the moment when everyone is shouting at once and no one can hear a thing.
It's only in hindsight that you realize what indeed your childhood was really like.
When you judge others, look at yourself - You too have flaws and the divine nature has accepted you with all your flaws. It doesn't judge you. Who are you to judge?
. . . the mind is desperate to fix the river {of events} in place: Possessed by ideas of the past, preoccupied with images of the future, it overlooks the plain truth of the moment.
And you know, there's less charm in life when you think about death--but it's more peaceful.
The accretion of dangerous power does not come in a day. It does come, however slowly, from the generative force of unchecked disregard of the restrictions that fence in even the most disinterested assertion of authority.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.