What assumption does the argument about human aggressiveness leading to perpetual wars represent?

The argument that human aggressiveness leads to perpetual wars embodies the assumption of causal oversimplification because it reduces a complex issue—global conflict and war—to a single cause: human aggressiveness. This perspective implies a direct and uncomplicated relationship between inherent human traits and ongoing warfare, neglecting numerous other factors that contribute to conflict, such as political, economic, social, and historical contexts.

Causal oversimplification often occurs when an argument attributes a multifaceted problem to one primary cause, failing to consider the interactions and influences of additional variables. In the context of war, this view overlooks the roles of ideology, resource scarcity, power dynamics, cultural differences, and diplomacy, all of which can significantly impact the occurrence and nature of conflict. By failing to account for these complexities, the argument misrepresents the reality of why wars happen and perpetuate in human society.