CAD – 53 | VARC1000

The trajectory of human history has, interestingly, been characterized by a decline in the sheer brutality and frequency
of violence. It is tempting to romanticize pre-state societies as peaceful, but evidence like the proportions of skeletons
with signs of violent death suggest otherwise. While the absolute numbers killed in tribal conflicts might have been
lower, the frequency and the proportion of the population involved in such altercations were significantly higher. If such
rates were transposed onto more recent, larger populations, the death toll would be staggering.

When considering early civilizations, it is essential to objectively evaluate their violent tendencies. Many of these
societies, despite being hailed as paragons of morality, celebrated violence and proscribed brutal punishments for
what today might be deemed minor infractions. However, it is also important to note that these practices weren't
exclusive to any one civilization; a number of ancient societies showcased similar tendencies in their records.

Quantitative data from medieval to modern times is scarce, but the instances of barbarism and crude punishment
methods declined notably over the past few centuries. Slavery, amputation, and similarly harsh practices became
obsolete, suggesting a more humane shift in societal norms. Meanwhile, records for another kind of violence—
homicide—present a clear trend. Homicide rates in Western Europe, for example, plummeted from high rates in the
14th century to significantly lower ones by the 1960s.

Over the last few decades, comprehensive data further highlights the decline of global violence. The number of battle
deaths in interstate wars, coups, and deadly riots has decreased significantly. This decline is even more evident post
the cold war, where state-based conflicts reduced substantially, and those that did occur usually ended in negotiated
settlements rather than protracted battles. This doesn't mean violent tendencies have been eradicated. Many
individuals might still harbor violent fantasies, but the propensity to act on them has substantially reduced.

Several theories attempt to explain this decline in violence. One explanation is the logic of anarchy: when there's no
central authority, the logic of preemptive self-defense can escalate conflicts. Centralized states, by maintaining a
monopoly on violence, can mediate and prevent these conflicts. Another theory suggests that as our lives improve and
lengthen with technology and economic progress, we come to value life more, making us less prone to causing harm.
Yet another explanation draws upon the logic of non-zero-sum games, suggesting that as societies become more
interconnected, there's more to gain from cooperation and peaceful exchanges than from violent confrontations.

The current state of relative peace is not a call for complacency. Violence, in many forms, still exists and requires
concerted efforts to be eradicated. However, recognizing and understanding the patterns and causes behind the
decline of violence can be instrumental. Instead of perpetually asking why there's war, perhaps it's time to question
and understand the underlying factors behind periods of peace. The shifts in human behavior, while complex, hint at
the capacity for positive change. As we delve into the reasons behind this decline, it is crucial to ensure that the
trajectory continues, making the world an increasingly less violent place.

Page 1 of 8
CAD Detail
Source: Adapted from this larger article in The New Republic of about 3000 words -
https://newrepublic.com/article/77728/history-violence

Word Length: 515

Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level: 13.4

Page 2 of 8
Comprehension Check
Identify the key sentence and key point of each paragraph
[1] The trajectory of human history has, interestingly, been characterized by a decline in the
sheer brutality and frequency of violence. [2] It is tempting to romanticize pre-state societies
as peaceful, but evidence like the proportions of skeletons with signs of violent death suggest
otherwise. [3] While the absolute numbers killed in tribal conflicts might have been lower, the
frequency and the proportion of the population involved in such altercations were significantly
higher. [4] If such rates were transposed onto more recent, larger populations, the death toll
would be staggering.

[5] When considering early civilizations, it is essential to objectively evaluate their violent
tendencies. [6] Many of these societies, despite being hailed as paragons of morality,
celebrated violence and proscribed brutal punishments for what today might be deemed
minor infractions. [7] However, it is also important to note that these practices weren't
exclusive to any one civilization; a number of ancient societies showcased similar tendencies
in their records.

[8] Quantitative data from medieval to modern times is scarce, but the instances of barbarism
and crude punishment methods declined notably over the past few centuries. [9] Slavery,
amputation, and similarly harsh practices became obsolete, suggesting a more humane shift
in societal norms. [10] Meanwhile, records for another kind of violence—homicide—present a
clear trend. [11] Homicide rates in Western Europe, for example, plummeted from high rates
in the 14th century to significantly lower ones by the 1960s.

[12] Over the last few decades, comprehensive data further highlights the decline of global
violence. [13] The number of battle deaths in interstate wars, coups, and deadly riots has
decreased significantly. [14] This decline is even more evident post the cold war, where
state-based conflicts reduced substantially, and those that did occur usually ended in
negotiated settlements rather than protracted battles. [15] This doesn't mean violent
tendencies have been eradicated. [16] Many individuals might still harbor violent fantasies,
but the propensity to act on them has substantially reduced.

[17] Several theories attempt to explain this decline in violence. [18] One explanation is the
logic of anarchy: when there's no central authority, the logic of preemptive self-defense can
escalate conflicts. [19] Centralized states, by maintaining a monopoly on violence, can
mediate and prevent these conflicts. [20] Another theory suggests that as our lives improve
and lengthen with technology and economic progress, we come to value life more, making us
less prone to causing harm. [21] Yet another explanation draws upon the logic of non-zero-
sum games, suggesting that as societies become more interconnected, there's more to gain
from cooperation and peaceful exchanges than from violent confrontations.

[22] The current state of relative peace is not a call for complacency. [23] Violence, in many
forms, still exists and requires concerted efforts to be eradicated. [24] However, recognizing
and understanding the patterns and causes behind the decline of violence can be
instrumental. [25] Instead of perpetually asking why there's war, perhaps it's time to question
and understand the underlying factors behind periods of peace. [26] The shifts in human
behavior, while complex, hint at the capacity for positive change. [27] As we delve into the
reasons behind this decline, it is crucial to ensure that the trajectory continues, making the
world an increasingly less violent place.

[Answers on the next page]

Page 3 of 8
[1] The trajectory of human history has, interestingly, been characterized by a decline in the Despite misconceptions,
sheer brutality and frequency of violence. [2] It is tempting to romanticize pre-state societies evidence suggests that pre-
as peaceful, but evidence like the proportions of skeletons with signs of violent death suggest state societies were more
otherwise. [3] While the absolute numbers killed in tribal conflicts might have been lower, the violent proportionally than later
frequency and the proportion of the population involved in such altercations were significantly civilizations.
higher. [4] If such rates were transposed onto more recent, larger populations, the death toll
would be staggering.

[5] When considering early civilizations, it is essential to objectively evaluate their violent Early civilizations, often seen as
tendencies. [6] Many of these societies, despite being hailed as paragons of morality, moral exemplars, had violent
celebrated violence and proscribed brutal punishments for what today might be deemed tendencies common across
minor infractions. [7] However, it is also important to note that these practices weren't different societies.
exclusive to any one civilization; a number of ancient societies showcased similar tendencies
in their records.

[8] Quantitative data from medieval to modern times is scarce, but the instances of barbarism Violence, including specific acts
and crude punishment methods declined notably over the past few centuries. [9] Slavery, like homicide, has decreased
amputation, and similarly harsh practices became obsolete, suggesting a more humane shift notably over the centuries in
in societal norms. [10] Meanwhile, records for another kind of violence—homicide—present a regions like Western Europe.
clear trend. [11] Homicide rates in Western Europe, for example, plummeted from high rates
in the 14th century to significantly lower ones by the 1960s.

[12] Over the last few decades, comprehensive data further highlights the decline of global There's a significant decline in
violence. [13] The number of battle deaths in interstate wars, coups, and deadly riots has global violence, especially after
decreased significantly. [14] This decline is even more evident post the cold war, where the cold war, though violent
state-based conflicts reduced substantially, and those that did occur usually ended in tendencies haven't been
negotiated settlements rather than protracted battles. [15] This doesn't mean violent completely eradicated.
tendencies have been eradicated. [16] Many individuals might still harbor violent fantasies,
but the propensity to act on them has substantially reduced.

[17] Several theories attempt to explain this decline in violence. [18] One explanation is the Various theories, from the role
logic of anarchy: when there's no central authority, the logic of preemptive self-defense can of centralized states to the
escalate conflicts. [19] Centralized states, by maintaining a monopoly on violence, can increased value of life, suggest
mediate and prevent these conflicts. [20] Another theory suggests that as our lives improve reasons for the decline in
and lengthen with technology and economic progress, we come to value life more, making us violence.
less prone to causing harm. [21] Yet another explanation draws upon the logic of non-zero-
sum games, suggesting that as societies become more interconnected, there's more to gain
from cooperation and peaceful exchanges than from violent confrontations.

[22] The current state of relative peace is not a call for complacency. [23] Violence, in many Despite the decline in violence,
forms, still exists and requires concerted efforts to be eradicated. [24] However, recognizing it's essential to understand the
and understanding the patterns and causes behind the decline of violence can be reasons for peace and continue
instrumental. [25] Instead of perpetually asking why there's war, perhaps it's time to question working towards a less violent
and understand the underlying factors behind periods of peace. [26] The shifts in human world.
behavior, while complex, hint at the capacity for positive change. [27] As we delve into the
reasons behind this decline, it is crucial to ensure that the trajectory continues, making the
world an increasingly less violent place.

Page 4 of 8
Central Theme:
The passage provides a comprehensive exploration of the trajectory of violence throughout human history.
Starting with a portrayal of unexpected violent tendencies in pre-state societies, it charts the progression of
such tendencies through early civilizations and up to modern times. The narrative underscores this
historical analysis with data, suggesting a marked decline in violent behaviors and practices over the
centuries. The theme culminates in presenting theories that attempt to explain this decline, emphasizing the
importance of understanding our past to foster a more peaceful future.

Tone:
The author adopts a tone that is both analytical and cautiously optimistic. The analytical aspect is evident in
the methodical presentation of evidence, from skeletal remains in early societies to quantitative data in
more recent times, ensuring the narrative remains grounded in fact. Concurrently, the cautiously optimistic
tone shines through in the acknowledgment of humanity's potential for positive change, even while
highlighting existing violent tendencies and cautioning against complacency. This combination provides a
balanced perspective, encouraging hope while emphasizing the need for continued vigilance.

Structure:
The passage is structured to guide the reader through a historical analysis of the prevalence and
acceptance of violence in human societies, leading to a current state of relative peace and its underlying
reasons, and concluding with a note of caution and introspection.

Para 1: Initiates the discussion by challenging common notions about violence in pre-state societies,
presenting evidence of their violent nature when evaluated proportionally.

Para 2: Progresses into early civilizations, offering a balanced view: while they might be perceived as
moral, they were not devoid of violent tendencies, a trait shared across multiple civilizations. This creates a
link to the previous paragraph’s mention of historical violence.

Para 3: Moves into a more recent timeframe, from medieval to modern times, indicating a decline in overtly
violent practices. The mention of specific data points, such as homicide rates in Western Europe, provides
concrete evidence of this decline.

Para 4: Zooms into the most recent decades, providing a broader perspective of global violence trends. It
contrasts significant milestones like the end of the cold war with the underlying human tendencies towards
violence, presenting a more nuanced view.

Para 5: Delves into the theoretical aspect, addressing the "why" behind the observed decline in violence. It
proposes various theories, ranging from the benefits of centralized governance to economic and
technological advancements. This offers an analytical explanation of the historical data presented in earlier
paragraphs.

Para 6: Concludes with a forward-looking perspective, moving from the descriptive and analytical tones of
previous paragraphs to a prescriptive one. It cautions against complacency, urging for continued
understanding and efforts to foster peace.

The progression is chronological, starting from pre-state societies, moving through early civilizations,
medieval to modern times, and then the most recent decades. This timeline-based progression is
punctuated with theories explaining the observed changes, leading to a reflective conclusion. Each
paragraph naturally builds on its predecessor, weaving a cohesive narrative about the evolution and
reduction of violence throughout human history.

Page 5 of 8
Reasoning Check
Choose the best alternative

1. Considering the passage's description of early civilizations, which statement is most plausible?
a) Their sociopolitical structures were dominated by centralized bodies that actively curtailed violence.
b) Their inhabitants, influenced by specific cultural norms, sometimes displayed impulsive judgment.
c) Across a broad spectrum, these civilizations showcased comparable tendencies towards violence.

2. To accept the assertions made in Para 1, what underlying assumption is imperative?

a) Many of the modern societies have robust frameworks that can help reduce tribal conflict probabilities.
b) Skeletons can, in many instances, provide a comprehensive reflection of historical violent tendencies.
c) All societies, regardless of their stage, had consistent experiences of violent confrontations.

3. In terms of the broader argument, how does the statement "This doesn't mean violent tendencies have been
eradicated" in Para 4 contribute?
a) It functions as a prelude, preparing readers for an upcoming counter-argument that the author seeks to
undertake.
b) While aligning with prior points, it layers the discussion, enriching the narrative with varied perspectives.
c) It primarily captures and reflects the foundational sentiment reverberating throughout the passage.

4. Which statement, if found accurate, could potentially counter the narrative of the passage?
a) Pre-state societies possessed a distinct segment responsible for mediating and maintaining tranquility.
b) Contemporary innovations, while escalating the volume of reported violence, don't necessarily indicate its actual
prevalence.
c) Many ancient texts across civilizations resonated with stories of communities thriving in harmony.

5. Which assertion, if validated, would further reinforce the passage's core argument?
a) Fresh forensic analyses consistently echo previous assertions regarding violent fatalities in archaic societies.
b) Some ancient societies experienced gaps in their documented history due to various unforeseen calamities.
c) Today's skirmishes and battles, although widespread, often remain underrepresented in key communication
platforms.

6. The dynamic between the historical decline in violence and the ensuing explanatory theories could best be
paralleled to:
a) Recognizing a disease's outward signs and subsequently formulating its precise medical interpretation.
b) Understanding the nuanced relationship between a plant's health and the underlying process of photosynthesis.
c) Observing alterations in global climatic patterns and associating them with grounded scientific theories.

7. Given the passage's insights, which statement aligns most closely with the author's perspective?
a) The diminishing presence of violence is emblematic of our modern times, almost marking its cessation.
b) Probing the factors promoting lasting peace can unearth insights as significant as those derived from studying
warfare origins.
c) Ancient communities, with minimal deviations, always manifested heightened violent impulses when compared
to contemporary societies.

8. In today's context, how might one aptly employ the knowledge this passage furnishes?
a) Use it to argue the unmatched safety credentials of our current era to global communities.
b) Elevate early societies as unparalleled examples, highlighting their moral excellence.
c) Utilize historic lessons as guiding posts, shaping modern endeavors aimed at sustaining peace.

[Answers on the next page]

Page 6 of 8
1. Considering the passage's description of early civilizations, which statement is most plausible?
a) Their sociopolitical structures were dominated by centralized bodies that actively curtailed violence.
b) Their inhabitants, influenced by specific cultural norms, sometimes displayed impulsive judgment.
c) Across a broad spectrum, these civilizations showcased comparable tendencies towards violence.

a) The passage neither specifies nor hints at centralized bodies in early civilizations that acted against violence. A key
tenet of the passage is the highlighting of pre-state societies and their violent tendencies, suggesting a lack of centralized
authority.

b) The passage mentions early civilizations' "violent tendencies" and "brutal punishments," but there's no direct
implication about inhabitants displaying impulsive judgment. Instead, the passage emphasizes societal norms and
practices.

c) The passage directly states, "these practices weren't exclusive to any one civilization; a number of ancient societies
showcased similar tendencies in their records." This option is the most closely aligned with the provided data.

2. To accept the assertions made in Para 1, what underlying assumption is imperative?

a) Many of the modern societies have robust frameworks that can help reduce tribal conflict probabilities.
b) Skeletons can, in many instances, provide a comprehensive reflection of historical violent tendencies.
c) All societies, regardless of their stage, had consistent experiences of violent confrontations.

a) The mention of tribal conflicts in paragraph one is used to highlight their frequency and proportion of population
involvement compared to the total deaths. Modern societies and their frameworks aren't discussed in this context.

b) This option is crucial because the assertion that pre-state societies were violent rests on the evidence of the
proportions of skeletons with signs of violent death. Without this evidence being valid, the assertion falls apart.

c) The passage does not make a generalization about every society's violent experiences; it emphasizes a comparison
of different periods.

3. In terms of the broader argument, how does the statement "This doesn't mean violent tendencies have been
eradicated" in Para 4 contribute?
a) It functions as a prelude, preparing readers for an upcoming counter-argument that the author seeks to
undertake.
b) While aligning with prior points, it layers the discussion, enriching the narrative with varied perspectives.
c) It primarily captures and reflects the foundational sentiment reverberating throughout the passage.

a) While the statement introduces a counterpoint, it isn't used to set up a forthcoming counter-argument; the passage
continues to discuss the decline in violence.

b) This statement nuances the main argument. Even though there's been a decline in violent acts, violent tendencies,
or thoughts of violence, might still persist. It adds depth to the understanding of violence's nature over time.

c) The foundational sentiment of the passage is about the decline in violence, not the continuation of violent tendencies.

4. Which statement, if found accurate, could potentially counter the narrative of the passage?
a) Pre-state societies possessed a distinct segment responsible for mediating and maintaining tranquility.
b) Contemporary innovations, while escalating the volume of reported violence, don't necessarily indicate its actual
prevalence.
c) Many ancient texts across civilizations resonated with stories of communities thriving in harmony.

a) This directly contradicts the description of pre-state societies as having high frequencies of violence. If there was an
effective mediation segment, it would challenge the data and observations presented.

b) The passage focuses on historical patterns and not the influence of contemporary innovations on violence reports.

c) The mention of "many" and not "all" civilizations and ancient texts means that there could be exceptions. However,
the passage's general narrative remains unchallenged.

Page 7 of 8
5. Which assertion, if validated, would further reinforce the passage's core argument?
a) Fresh forensic analyses consistently echo previous assertions regarding violent fatalities in archaic societies.
b) Some ancient societies experienced gaps in their documented history due to various unforeseen calamities.
c) Today's skirmishes and battles, although widespread, often remain underrepresented in key communication
platforms.
a) The argument about pre-state societies being violent is based on skeletal evidence. If new forensic analyses
reaffirmed these findings, the passage's argument would be strengthened.

b) This doesn't have a direct bearing on the violence trend discussed.

c) While this might suggest a continuation of violence, it doesn't reinforce the overall decline in violence discussed in
the passage.

6. The dynamic between the historical decline in violence and the ensuing explanatory theories could best be
paralleled to:
a) Recognizing a disease's outward signs and subsequently formulating its precise medical interpretation.
b) Understanding the nuanced relationship between a plant's health and the underlying process of photosynthesis.
c) Observing alterations in global climatic patterns and associating them with grounded scientific theories.

a) The disease analogy doesn't fully capture the idea of observing a trend (decline in violence) and then seeking
explanations for it.

b) This analogy is more about cause-effect and doesn't parallel historical observation and theorizing.

c) This option fits best because it parallels the action of observing a broad trend and then associating it with grounded
explanations.

7. Given the passage's insights, which statement aligns most closely with the author's perspective?
a) The diminishing presence of violence is emblematic of our modern times, almost marking its cessation.
b) Probing the factors promoting lasting peace can unearth insights as significant as those derived from studying
warfare origins.
c) Ancient communities, with minimal deviations, always manifested heightened violent impulses when compared
to contemporary societies.

a) The passage acknowledges the decline in violence but also cautions against complacency, indicating it's not
completely diminished.

b) The author’s ending suggests a shift in focus from understanding war to understanding peace.

c) The passage does not assert that ancient communities always had higher violent impulses than modern societies.

8. In today's context, how might one aptly employ the knowledge this passage furnishes?
a) Use it to argue the unmatched safety credentials of our current era to global communities.
b) Elevate early societies as unparalleled examples, highlighting their moral excellence.
c) Utilize historic lessons as guiding posts, shaping modern endeavors aimed at sustaining peace.

a) The passage provides relative comparisons of peace but doesn't make absolute claims about unmatched safety.

b) The passage counters idealizing early societies and their moral standing.

c) The passage's essence lies in understanding patterns to ensure and enhance peace, making this the most appropriate
application.

Page 8 of 8