It's evident that most human beings think that war can never be avoided and for these reason many of the societal ideas have been based on the concept that violence is part of human nature. Human social, scientific thinking, religious and political ideas are basically based on idea that every person is born a killer. Violence is much in us that it's rarely questioned by the society and other people. As human we tend to look for the cause of evil things or those that are considered to be vile for instance violence as we fail to look for the cause of the good things that are happening around us. Violence is thought to be caused by frustration and this is best explained by the aggression theory. For these reason one of the many questions in the human minds is how violence became part of us (Senker and Gifford 8).
Violence is one of the prominent things in our civilization. Smell of war and violence has left its victims confused about what they might have done to deserve such a harsh treatment. As those who caused the much affliction and pain to humanity defend themselves by saying that was all that they had to do; we can't help it but wonder if violence is truly inborn in us. Despite the fact that violence is one of the best way that is applied by human to cover their inner emptiness and frustration it usually brings more harm than any good. For example those who have been victims of bombing and war are usually left with a scar that can never disappear or heal. Its very painful and difficult to loose your whole family in war and this are some of the daily happenings in our society (Kurtz and Turpin 100).
Despite the controversies and argument surrounding these concept there are organizations which have come up with some evidence to dispel the concept of violence being perceived as innate human trait. For example UNESCO came up with a statement to oppose these belief and they further planned to incorporate their research into the student curriculum in order to mould the young people in the rightful way. Sigmund Freud argues that there is a spontaneous and natural aggression energy which is reserved within humans. And in order to avoid harmful deeds he recommends that one should do competitive sports more often in order for this energy to be removed. Freud argues that those who do not do exercise are more likely to indulge into violence as a way of removing the extra energy (Senker and Gifford 10).
Many have regarded this model to be false since other behaviorist have indicated that the origin of violence is something which is external as opposed to internal stimulant. Some irritant external factors are thought to stimulate violent deeds and behavior. They support this fact by the aspect that many communities live quite well without any form of aggression and secondly he argues that there is no evidence to prove that there exists an in build pressure within people that makes them to behave violently. On the contrary if it's true that there is energy that accumulates within us then we are not supposed to be aggressive as Aristotle indicates in his theory. Research that has been done indicate that people become violent by consistently watching or taking part in violent deeds. This is attributed to the fact that engagement in aggressive deeds enables one to react aggressively therefore if one has not accumulated violent scenes in his mind as a result of watching or practicing violent deeds they cannot become violent.
Scientist concluded in 1986 that there is no scientific evidence to prove that aggression and violence is inborn. Despite the fact that it cannot be scientifically proven whether men are naturally violent the belief of the same is strongly held by our society. Some argue that animals are naturally violent and since we share the same ancestral line we cannot alienate ourselves from this truth. Our history has many stories about war, and cruelty and at the same point the physiologist has indicated that our brains have some hormones that are related to aggression and for these reason biologically man is created violent. It's important for humans to draw a line between themselves and animals since human beings are very complex than animals. There are many aspects that are in humans which are absent in animals. For example humans have the ability to reason whereas animals are not in a position to critically reason (Kurtz and Turpin 57).
In spite the fact that science informs us about our ancestry we should not limit our mind to the actions of animals. Let's not allow the animal behavior to influence our actions as a society. For these reason we should not allow our instincts to influence us the same way animals are influenced. When we are violent because our relatives which are animals are also violent then we are not using the knowledge that we were given as humans. On the other hand animal are not very violent as many think unless they equate hunting to violence. Animals rare form aggression groups and if this actually happen it must be as a result of the circumstance animals found themselves in or because of the environment. Among the humans there is violate behavior but that does not give us the reason to belief that violence is innate. Therefore it's important for us to realize that by the fact that something is universal done does not mean that it's natural and innate. For instance, by the fact that several communities may be producing pottery is not an indication that there is a pottery gene in that community (Baumeister and Bushman 306).
Therefore aggression is not a universal thing since there are some cultures which are peaceful. For these reason humans are not born violent simply because not all people are violent. It's also true that men who are very primitive are not war like; war like character has increased among the modern men. One can choose to be violent or peaceful and a good example is Sweden which in the past years was a violent nation but at the moments it's rated among peaceful industrialized nation. On addition violence and war has a lot to do with politics, personal interest as well as the social setting therefore this practice has little to do with nature.
The fact that war is a dominant aspect of our history does not men that war is part of a humane nature. Therefore whether we believe that we are naturally violent or not it's our decision. The belief is still rooted in our society and the many controversies about the same will still continue. Finally everyone has a responsibility to make a rightful decision. Therefore one can choose to be peaceful or violent because there is much knowledge that is bestowed upon humanity to make the rightful decision. Our bad choices and character should not be excused in the name of nature because them that succumb of this ill remain in a state of confusion as they keep wondering about the turn of things. Life is precious and peace is a wonderful experience that every sensible person may ever long for (Baumeister and Bushman 304).