In this study, the author empirically tests a formulation of Ellen Dissanayake's evolutionary theory of art, which argues that art evolved to promote group cohesion. The hypotheses derived from this theory and tested in this study specifically focus on ritual art and its relationships to various proxies for group cohesion such as community conflict and internal warfare. Results show that the presence of ritual art is significantly higher where certain measures of group cohesion are also higher (including lower internal warfare, lower conflict between communities of the same society, and lower frequency of violent conflict between groups within local communities).

In this study, the author empirically tests a formulation of Ellen Dissanayake's evolutionary theory of art, which argues that art evolved to promote group cohesion. The hypotheses derived from this theory and tested in this study specifically focus on ritual art and its relationships to various proxies for group cohesion such as community conflict and internal warfare. Results show that the presence of ritual art is significantly higher where certain measures of group cohesion are also higher (including lower internal warfare, lower conflict between communities of the same society, and lower frequency of violent conflict between groups within local communities).

In this study, the author empirically tests a formulation of Ellen Dissanayake's evolutionary theory of art, which argues that art evolved to promote group cohesion. The hypotheses derived from this theory and tested in this study specifically focus on ritual art and its relationships to various proxies for group cohesion such as community conflict and internal warfare. Results show that the presence of ritual art is significantly higher where certain measures of group cohesion are also higher (including lower internal warfare, lower conflict between communities of the same society, and lower frequency of violent conflict between groups within local communities).

In this study, the author empirically tests a formulation of Ellen Dissanayake's evolutionary theory of art, which argues that art evolved to promote group cohesion. The hypotheses derived from this theory and tested in this study specifically focus on ritual art and its relationships to various proxies for group cohesion such as community conflict and internal warfare. Results show that the presence of ritual art is significantly higher where certain measures of group cohesion are also higher (including lower internal warfare, lower conflict between communities of the same society, and lower frequency of violent conflict between groups within local communities).

In this study, the author empirically tests a formulation of Ellen Dissanayake's evolutionary theory of art, which argues that art evolved to promote group cohesion. The hypotheses derived from this theory and tested in this study specifically focus on ritual art and its relationships to various proxies for group cohesion such as community conflict and internal warfare. Results show that the presence of ritual art is significantly higher where certain measures of group cohesion are also higher (including lower internal warfare, lower conflict between communities of the same society, and lower frequency of violent conflict between groups within local communities).

This book examines the difference between warless and warlike societies and attempts to determine the point at which a society becomes warlike. The author suggests that differences between warless and warlike societies are mostly organizational and hypothesizes that "unsegmented" societies, or societies that have a weaker sense of group identity and cohesion, will be more likely to be warless than "segmented" societies. Several tests are presented. Results generally support the hypothesis.

This book examines the difference between warless and warlike societies and attempts to determine the point at which a society becomes warlike. The author suggests that differences between warless and warlike societies are mostly organizational and hypothesizes that "unsegmented" societies, or societies that have a weaker sense of group identity and cohesion, will be more likely to be warless than "segmented" societies. Several tests are presented. Results generally support the hypothesis.

This book examines the difference between warless and warlike societies and attempts to determine the point at which a society becomes warlike. The author suggests that differences between warless and warlike societies are mostly organizational and hypothesizes that "unsegmented" societies, or societies that have a weaker sense of group identity and cohesion, will be more likely to be warless than "segmented" societies. Several tests are presented. Results generally support the hypothesis.

This book examines the difference between warless and warlike societies and attempts to determine the point at which a society becomes warlike. The author suggests that differences between warless and warlike societies are mostly organizational and hypothesizes that "unsegmented" societies, or societies that have a weaker sense of group identity and cohesion, will be more likely to be warless than "segmented" societies. Several tests are presented. Results generally support the hypothesis.

This book examines the difference between warless and warlike societies and attempts to determine the point at which a society becomes warlike. The author suggests that differences between warless and warlike societies are mostly organizational and hypothesizes that "unsegmented" societies, or societies that have a weaker sense of group identity and cohesion, will be more likely to be warless than "segmented" societies. Several tests are presented. Results generally support the hypothesis.