Why the "fear, honour and interest" trinity harms our understanding of war
| Authors | |
|---|---|
| Year of publication | 2021 |
| Type | Article in Periodical |
| Magazine / Source | The RUSI Journal |
| MU Faculty or unit | |
| Citation | |
| Web | https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03071847.2021.1939771 |
| Doi | http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03071847.2021.1939771 |
| Keywords | Fear; Honour; Interest; Thucydides; Emotion |
| Attached files | |
| Description | While the ‘fear, honour and interest’ trinity is immensely popular, it is also fallacious. Samuel Zilincik discusses how the trinity is not a neutral analytical tool but rather a rhetorical instrument to advocate foreign aggression. It conveys an incomplete picture of war causation by focusing on the aggressor’s motivation while ignoring that of the defender. It also insufficiently explains motivations for hostile behaviour by omitting salient stimuli and the variance of emotional motives across cultures. Through its popularity, the trinity also detracts attention from truly insightful observations that Thucydides made in his work. Zilincik suggests that going beyond the trinity is essential to enhancing knowledge of strategic affairs. |
| Related projects: |