Will we ever evolve past war?

Answer 1

That is an oxymoron. We may evolve into practical people that use
war because of it's efficiency, or we may devolve into pacifists.
Pacifism is a blind instinct that derives from evolutionary psychology.
If we become more advanced, then we will dispense with such
obsolete blind instincts. It is thus a logical contradiction to 'evolve
past war'.

Answer 2

Probably not.
As long as there is diversity of opinion, those opinions will clash. As long as mankind harbors an agressive need to enforce its own opinions, values and viewpoints onto others, there will be conflict.
When one person or group agressively attemps to force his/her/its opinions onto another, the only option for that other is to capitulate and surrender his/her/its OWN viewpoints and freedoms or fight back.

When this occurs on a national/multinational scale, it becomes what we define as WAR.
When the choice is between maintaining the peace by surrendering freedom and accepting an unacceptable lifestyle, or fighting back, WAR becomes inevitable.
For many - even perhaps, MOST of us - peace at the cost of total subjugation and complete loss of freedom is NOT peace, at all.

"Live and let live" is a beautiful philosophy, but it rarely prevails. Few individuals, even, allow their family, friends and other acquaintences this precious consideration within the small circles of their private lives. With its being so scarce in our private lives and personal relationships, how much rarer does it become as we branch out from there?
By the time we have reached all the way out into the field of politics - even on the smallest, local level - it has almost disappeared. When we reach the level of national politics, it becomes unheard-of!
No liberal says, "I don't like guns, so I won't buy one - but YOU can buy one if you want to."
No conservative says, "I disaprove of abortion, so I won't ever have one, but YOU can if you feel okay about it."
And THAT division is just WITHIN a SINGLE government. When ONE, SINGLE government cannot allow its own citizens to "live and let live" within their own individual values, how much more impossible does such a goal become when expanded to INTERnational scale?

It is a vicious cycle but I don't see how it can ever end well. The only possible end is in complete domination, so heavily oppressive that no group dares even try to stand up to it, and THAT would be a "peace" far worse than any war that has ever been or ever could be fought.

Answer 3

no. war is as old as humans. As long as someone has something, there is always going to be someone else who wants to take it or destroy it. The only way to evolve past war, is to have one blowout war, you know, the war to end all wars. When humans wipe themselves out, then war will be over.

Answer 4

We are sooooo close, yet so far away.

Respect for and development of human life require peace. Peace is not merely the absence of war, and it is not limited to maintaining a balance of powers between adversaries. Peace cannot be attained on earth without safeguarding the goods of persons, free communication among men, respect for the dignity of persons and peoples, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is "the tranquillity of order." Peace is the work of justice and the effect of charity.

Answer 5

We can hope and strive to make life peaceful without wars. That is the ultimate goal or should be.

However, will humans ever think and feel as one? If you answered yes, you are delusional. If you answered no, there is your answer and you are one smart cookie.

Answer 6

War exists to exerminate excess young males whose societies lack the resources and structures to absorb them. The simple end to war is contraception and abortion.

Europe's only brief period of peace from Roman times through WWII was three generations after the Black Plague. In 1000+ years of mass slaughter national boundaries did not meaninglfully change. WWI was an extraordinary technologically enabled slaughter of excess young males. One generation later it was again culling time.

No country whose women control their reproduction is aggressive. No feminized society can stand against the external violent appetites of testosterone. Consider the US soiling its panties in Iraq.

Answer 7

There's always some jerk who wants *more*.