“Does Peace Have a Chance?” written by John Horgan was published in Slate magazine in 2009 on the topic of war and human nature. Horgan argues that, despite popular opinion, human nature is not innately violent and that peace is possible amongst the human race. The author supports his thesis through statistics on mortality caused by war, anthropological studies of hunter-gatherer societies, and the decline of large scale warfare. In general, Horgan’s essay style is effective in persuading the audience to consider his opinion after reading. Although the author makes poor comparisons and lacks in some definitions, he successfully utilises narration and description to engage the audience, prove the credibility of both himself and his facts, and
…show more content…
237). By describing the museum’s contents and their opinion on war, the reader starts on a journey in which they recall their personal opinions on the inevitability of war in human society. The story relates the author as an equal to the reader, rather than a pompous academic writer. This fits well with the medium that the article was written for, and the intended audience. Later on in the article, John Horgan recalls asking his students “weather humans will ever stop fighting wars” (p. 238) in order to establish a general sense of how the population views the continuation of war. The majority replied yes, proving that public opinion is that war is a permanent fixture of the human condition. Using this device not only leads into a section in which he defends his position rather than prove, but reminds the reader of their own personal opinion on war. This allows the reader time to reflect on the essay thus far and how their position on the issue might have changed. The sufficient use of narratives makes the essay easier to read and follow, and makes his position more persuasive for the …show more content…
A minor adjustment that could have been made was to better define war in this essay. “[There have been] no wars between major industrialized powers since the end of World War II.” (p. 238) Wars such as the Vietnam (Encyclopædia Britannica., 2015) and Korean War (Office of the Historian, Bureau of Public Affairs, United States Department of State, 2015) were both fought after WWII and included China, Russia, and the United States, which could be considered to be between industrial powers, depending on definitions. Another flaw in the author’s argument was in his comparison of warfare throughout history. Although the numbers show a drastic fall in war-caused casualties, the evolution of warfare and medicine could account for some of the differences. “Warfare and other forms of violence led to 14 per cent of the deaths in these simple [hunter-gatherer] societies.” (Horgan, 2009, p. 238), modern warfare is beginning to fight with less and less human involvement on the front line, using drones compared to tactics such as those used in 1812 by European forces. Also the advancements made in medicine can aid those who were injured in combat and help extend life expectancy of
237). By describing the museum’s contents and their opinion on war, the reader starts on a journey in which they recall their personal opinions on the inevitability of war in human society. The story relates the author as an equal to the reader, rather than a pompous academic writer. This fits well with the medium that the article was written for, and the intended audience. Later on in the article, John Horgan recalls asking his students “weather humans will ever stop fighting wars” (p. 238) in order to establish a general sense of how the population views the continuation of war. The majority replied yes, proving that public opinion is that war is a permanent fixture of the human condition. Using this device not only leads into a section in which he defends his position rather than prove, but reminds the reader of their own personal opinion on war. This allows the reader time to reflect on the essay thus far and how their position on the issue might have changed. The sufficient use of narratives makes the essay easier to read and follow, and makes his position more persuasive for the …show more content…
A minor adjustment that could have been made was to better define war in this essay. “[There have been] no wars between major industrialized powers since the end of World War II.” (p. 238) Wars such as the Vietnam (Encyclopædia Britannica., 2015) and Korean War (Office of the Historian, Bureau of Public Affairs, United States Department of State, 2015) were both fought after WWII and included China, Russia, and the United States, which could be considered to be between industrial powers, depending on definitions. Another flaw in the author’s argument was in his comparison of warfare throughout history. Although the numbers show a drastic fall in war-caused casualties, the evolution of warfare and medicine could account for some of the differences. “Warfare and other forms of violence led to 14 per cent of the deaths in these simple [hunter-gatherer] societies.” (Horgan, 2009, p. 238), modern warfare is beginning to fight with less and less human involvement on the front line, using drones compared to tactics such as those used in 1812 by European forces. Also the advancements made in medicine can aid those who were injured in combat and help extend life expectancy of