The Human Potential for Peace: An Anthropological Challenge to Assumptions about War and Violence

Provides a re-evaluation of anthropological findings on violence, war, peace, and conflict management. Drawing upon data from both cultural studies and evolutionary biology, this volume challenges the view that humans are naturally violent and warlike and argues that we, in fact, possess a strong ability to prevent, limit, and resolve conflicts.
The Human Potential for Peace provides a clearly written, critical re-evaluation of anthropological findings on violence, war, peace, and conflict management. Drawing upon anthropological data from both cultural studies and evolutionary biology, this volume challenges the traditional view that humans are naturally violent and warlike and argues that we, in fact, possess a strong ability to prevent, limit, and resolve conflicts. In a highly readable style, the book critiques the assumptions, methodology, and logic of some previous studies, demonstrating a recurring bias in the literature that overemphasizes war and violence and ignores the human ability to resolve most conflicts without violence. Among the highly publicized anthropological controversies he examines are Derek Freeman's analysis of Margaret Mead's writings on Samoan warfare, Napoleon Chagnon's claims about the Yanomami, and ongoing debates about whether "hunter-gatherers" are peaceful or warlike.
The book also employs short ethnographic examples, findings from the author's own research among the Zapotec of Mexico, results of cross-cultural studies on warfare, descriptions of peaceful societies, and archaeological material to illustrate that peacemaking and conflict resolution patterns do exist across cultures and that non-warring societies exist in substantial numbers.