4 ms·

Centuries or a single century (20th)? I have no access to the book and I would be interested to see the numbers. It's hard to outdo the 20th century with the ju

by apr 13y ago

Centuries or a single century (20th)? I have no access to the book and I would be interested to see the numbers. It's hard to outdo the 20th century with the jump in the military technologies (starting with the machine gun, the first weapon of mass destruction), and two massive world wars. How, for example, do we compare to the 19th century?

maxerickson 13y ago
Pinker's claim is per capita deaths. I don't pretend to know if it is the correct measure, but it is at least an interesting measure of the human resources being put to war.
OvidNaso 13y ago
There are quite a few resources on Pinker's website about the work. The FAQ is probably a good place to start: http://stevenpinker.com/pages/frequently-asked-questions-about-better-angels-our-nature-why-violence-has-declined http://stevenpinker.com/pages/frequently-asked-questions-abo... Here is a direct answer to the question. There's a ton more info on the topic and a huge portion of his book is dedicated to it: *Wasn’t the 20th century the most violent in history? Probably not; see chapter 5, especially pp. 189–200. Historical data from past centuries are far less complete, but the existing estimates of death tolls, when calculated as a proportion of the world’s population at the time, show at least nine atrocities before the 20th century (that we know of) which may have been worse than World War II. They arose from collapsing empires, horse tribe invasions, the slave trade, and the annihilation of native peoples, with wars of religion close behind. World War I doesn’t even make the top ten. Also, a century comprises a hundred years, not just fifty, and the second half of the 20th century was host to a Long Peace (chapter 5) and a New Peace (chapter 6) with unusually low rates of death in warfare.
- apr 13y ago
  Thank you! The FAQ is very informative and indeed answers many questions.

by apr 13y ago

maxerickson 13y ago

Pinker's claim is per capita deaths. I don't pretend to know if it is the correct measure, but it is at least an interesting measure of the human resources being put to war.

OvidNaso 13y ago

There are quite a few resources on Pinker's website about the work. The FAQ is probably a good place to start: http://stevenpinker.com/pages/frequently-asked-questions-about-better-angels-our-nature-why-violence-has-declined http://stevenpinker.com/pages/frequently-asked-questions-abo... Here is a direct answer to the question. There's a ton more info on the topic and a huge portion of his book is dedicated to it: *Wasn’t the 20th century the most violent in history? Probably not; see chapter 5, especially pp. 189–200. Historical data from past centuries are far less complete, but the existing estimates of death tolls, when calculated as a proportion of the world’s population at the time, show at least nine atrocities before the 20th century (that we know of) which may have been worse than World War II. They arose from collapsing empires, horse tribe invasions, the slave trade, and the annihilation of native peoples, with wars of religion close behind. World War I doesn’t even make the top ten. Also, a century comprises a hundred years, not just fifty, and the second half of the 20th century was host to a Long Peace (chapter 5) and a New Peace (chapter 6) with unusually low rates of death in warfare.

apr 13y ago
Thank you! The FAQ is very informative and indeed answers many questions.