Is mankind inherently peaceful or warlike?

[Occulus]

Or are we permanently something in between?

[jadedcherub]

1. Well. at least we're in agreement we aint peaceful. ;) (n/t)

[Occulus]

2. Trick on that third option

there's a keyword there.

[Zinfandel]

Probably peaceful, but absolutely inherently greedy, which causes wars.

[bloodyjack]

3. i speak/type as a male

when i say that the nature of male relationships is rivalry. rivalry for mastery over space (workplace and salary), for mastery over time (sexual partners, and progeny). the nature of human relationships, in a modern context, boils down to an exchange, be it of information, pleasure, etc. on the whole, humans are egotistical, amazingly selfish animals for all this talk of how enlightened and evolved we are, or CAN BE. that's bullshit. pure bullshit.

[NuttyFluffers]

4. we are in between/both

we compete, because we are life, we compete for survival in a world of limited resources and other stressors.

we cooperate, because we are life, we cooperate for survival in a world filled with competators and other stressors.

there is your correct answer. :) war and peace is inherent, because without either we, and the rest of our ancestors, from fungi to human, woud have not survived. we are just the only species that craves meaning, that needs to ask why.

ps: very few organism initiate in real war, not just generic competition. we just happen to be one of them.

[Occulus]

5. Does that make 'war' and 'peace' a merely philosophical distinction?

As in, one, or the other, will exist?

[gyopsy]

6. Warlike

I've got thousands of years worth of history to back me up.

[opihimoimoi]

7. WarLuving Idiots but survivors, the peace guys died along while ago.

But wars will get you short term only. Peace is the final answer. we just don't realize it.

[blindpig]

8. in between

it's all in us, war just seems to be closer to the surface. It's our choice.