Final answer:
Robert Carniero's argument suggests that the development of warfare has reflected and influenced cultural and societal changes, impacting the nature of combat, the role of individuals in war, and the structure of societies. It also indicates that warfare is not inherent to civilization but becomes significant when tied to cultural beliefs and national identity.
Step-by-step explanation:
Applying Robert Carniero's argument to the relationship between the development of warfare and other situations suggests that the evolution of warfare is both a reflection and a driver of broader cultural, technological, and social changes. For instance, as military technology advanced, the nature of combat changed from individual confrontations to mass destruction capable of affecting large populations, as seen with the introduction of machine guns and artillery in the World Wars. This transformation rendered personal heroism and skill less relevant in the face of overwhelming mechanical force. Additionally, war's duration and the toll it takes on societies underscore that conflicts often extend beyond initial expectations, leading to significant societal and cultural shifts, such as those seen during the American Civil War.In essence, while human nature does not predetermine aggressive behavior, it also does not preclude peaceful coexistence. The choice between war and peace often hin ges on how societies adhere to cultural perceptions and whether they challenge or succumb to maladaptive cultural delusions.