Origins of War: Classical Sociological Theory Explained
This paper examines the origins of war through the lens of classical sociological theory, tracing how thinkers from Hobbes and Locke to Comte, Durkheim, Marx, and Weber have sought to explain human conflict and violence. It contrasts Enlightenment rationalism—which held that war could be eliminated through scientific progress and rational social reconstruction—with the French conservative sociological tradition, which emphasized irrational elements of human nature, tradition, religion, and shared values as essential to social order. The paper argues that purely empirical frameworks are insufficient to account for the persistence of war, and suggests that a more holistic approach—one that takes ethics, morality, and even spiritual dimensions seriously—may better illuminate why conflict has been a universal feature of human society across all times and cultures.
- Introduction: Framing the origins-of-war question philosophically
- The Origins of War in Classical Theory: Enlightenment vs. conservative sociological approaches
- Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau on War and the State: Social contract theories and the state of nature
- Comte, Spencer, and Durkheim on Conflict and Social Order: Positivism, evolution, and social solidarity
- Marx, Weber, and the Structural Causes of War: Capitalism, state power, and war's structural roots
- Personal Observations on Sociological Theory and Ethics: Ethics, morality, and limits of empirical sociology
- Conclusion: Synthesis favoring conservative sociological tradition
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper synthesizes a wide range of classical theorists—Hobbes, Rousseau, Comte, Spencer, Durkheim, Marx, and Weber—around a single focused question, creating a coherent comparative argument rather than a disconnected survey.
- The author's personal voice is woven throughout without overwhelming the scholarly content, particularly in the "My Observations" section, which draws a clear normative conclusion from the theoretical review.
- The paper uses the French conservative sociological school as a recurring counterpoint to Enlightenment rationalism, giving the argument a consistent analytical thread.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates effective use of theoretical comparison: rather than simply describing each theorist in isolation, it positions them in tension with one another (e.g., Hobbes vs. Locke, Enlightenment rationalism vs. French conservatism), allowing the author to build a cumulative argument about the limits of purely empirical sociological frameworks.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a broad philosophical framing of the origins-of-war question, then moves through major classical theorists in roughly chronological order. A dedicated personal-observations section evaluates the competing frameworks before a conclusion synthesizes the author's normative preference for the conservative sociological tradition. Citations are drawn from Ritzer (2008), Ritzer and Stepnisky (2018), and Simmons (2013).
Introduction
The origins of war—are they inherent within the human condition? Are they part of the human personality, the human spirit, the inner turmoil and conflict in the psyche or soul? Why do people fight? Why does conflict exist in society? These questions, and those like them, get to the heart of the human condition and have been asked by philosophers, psychologists, sociologists, politicians, theologians, and anyone who has ever bothered to consider the many conflicts and violent altercations between individuals, groups, and nations throughout history.
For many centuries in the West it was well understood that the cause of violence and war was related to the spiritual fall of humankind—indeed, this was the viewpoint of the conservative French sociological theorists who objected to the Enlightenment. These conservatives held fast to the traditional Fall story related in the religious texts of Judaism and Christianity. With the Enlightenment, however, modern society broke with the past and sought to create new explanations that dispensed with faith-based accounts of the human condition. Enlightenment thinkers sought to make sense of the human condition by applying reason alone to the problem. In doing so, myriad theorists and scholars put forth explanations and cosmologies to explain the problem of man, the problem of pain, the problem of violence, and the problem of war.
The three main ethical theories essentially summarize the whole of them—virtue ethics, deontology (duty ethics), and consequentialism (i.e., utilitarianism and egoism). Yet, oddly enough, as Ritzer and Stepnisky (2018) point out, ethics and morality have not been a major focus for sociologists. Could that be changing? Ritzer and Stepnisky (2018) add that "whereas only a decade or so ago many sociologists might have been embarrassed if not vexed to discuss 'ethics' and 'morality,' the increasing amorality and immorality of the public and private sectors of our society may be tacitly leading or forcing us back to fundamental inquiries, such as the moral basis of modern society, ideal and actual" (p. 157). It may be, therefore, that ethics and sociological theory should be better integrated if the big questions—like what are the origins of war—are to be answered.
In the end, it is quite likely that the answers will lead inevitably back to the question of God, as things often do when one begins to take on the biggest and most puzzling of all questions. Not all will agree with that—but there is enough historical and literary evidence available to support the claim nonetheless (for instance, Dostoevsky's "Grand Inquisitor" dilemma). This paper examines the question from the standpoint of the classical theorists and offers a personal assessment of their contributions.
References
Ritzer, G. (2008). Sociological theory. McGraw-Hill.
Ritzer, G., & Stepnisky, J. (2018). Classical sociological theory (10th ed.). Sage Publications.
Simmons, T. (2013). Revitalizing the classics: What past social theorists can teach us today. Fernwood Publishing.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.