Analysis Of William James The Moral Equivalent Of War

Words: 1406
Pages: 6

Many people have noticed a tension between William James’s theories and his lack of involvement in political philosophy. It would seem that a philosopher who lamented philosophy’s tendencies toward abstraction and shying away from the public sphere would respond to the problems of his time. However, James never wrote systematically about political philosophy. Nevertheless, “The Moral Equivalent of War” is William James’s one explicitly political text. During the anti-imperialism movement was seen as a public intellectual. His essay “The Moral Equivalent of War” was published in numerous popular magazines and distributed through leaflets. However, there is much debate about the relevance of James’s positions. Some see James as merely reacting …show more content…
If millions of Americans were asked if they would like to expunge the civil war from history and still retain the current conditions only a handful of eccentric people would say yes. War allowed people to be self-sacrificing, heroic, and adventurous. At the same time, if you “ask those same people whether they would be willing in cold blood to start another civil war now to gain another similar possession, and not one man or woman would vote for the proposition.” People recognized the irrationality and violence associated with war yet they still found war psychologically attractive. As James states, “Showings wars irrationality and horror is of no effect upon him. The horrors make the fascination. War is the strong life; it is a life in extremis; war-taxes are the only ones men never hesitate to pay, as the budgets of all nations show us.” For James, “The plain truth is that people want war.” Humans have been fighting throughout history. History is a “bath of blood” and “our ancestors have bred pugnacity into our bone and marrow, and thousands of years of peace will not breed out wars” Consequently, if one wants war to cease, one must address human desire for