Not being a biologist, add a grain of salt and all that, but...
Of course not! It's just not even remotely feasible. There are two reasons, but I'll start with the big one.
We have shown a marked inability to micromanage "changing human nature for the better." We just don't understand enough about the brain to make e.g. violent criminals stop being violent, using psychology, drugs, surgery, or anything else really. See any crime statistics you like on the subject. The one exception is wherein we can stop someone from being violent, by basically stopping them from doing anything -- not a desirable outcome as applied to the entire human population.
The second reason it's not feasible is, well... What happens to the one guy who finds out about this, and spends a year in his basement becoming completely immune to the vector? People are resistant to gene therapy vectors from time to time, with no deliberate action. Deliberate action just makes this scenario more likely.
Eliminating violence is a nice sentiment, but this methodology is just not even remotely feasible. Ethics are a whole other can of worms.
There's an experimental webcomic about an alternate history of the afghan war where the military develops a spy network of millions of robotic spiders, but for lack of operators decides to open source their operation on the internet.
Idiotically dangerous, for two reasons. The qualities you would eliminate are the very ones that help our survival as a species. Second, and more important, wars are always about population pressure and competition for resources. Always. Your virus could poop Valium and morphine -- but it wouldn't change the root cause.
No, rarely. The Second World War was party about resources, in that Hitler wanted lebensraum, and the proximal cause for the USA getting into the war was Imperial Japan's desire for the oil and territory of the Dutch East Indies. But Japan only wanted to take that because its wars of conquest got it embargoed. Had it stayed peaceful it could have just bought the oil, a much cheaper prospect. So, it's more like the oil was an issue because of the war, not the need for oil causing the war. However, Vietnam, Korea, WWI, the American civil war, and the war for independence... what resouces are you talking about?
...wars are always about population pressure and competition for resources. Always. Your virus could poop Valium and morphine -- but it wouldn't change the root cause.
You're begging the question. There is no 'be violent' chemical in our brains. It's a complex emergent behavior. So your hypothetical virus would either be ineffective, or so effective it make the organism (that's YOU) unable to feed itself.
Decreasing our testosterone would reduce violent tendancies, but it would also mess with our ability to reproduce. And besides, war isn't usually about irrational aggression, it's often more about fear, which afaik is mitigated by testosterone
Cures take time and scientists can work on many such viruses -- though you would need to ensure that being infected by several such viruses does not yield bad results.
Of course not! It's just not even remotely feasible. There are two reasons, but I'll start with the big one.
We have shown a marked inability to micromanage "changing human nature for the better." We just don't understand enough about the brain to make e.g. violent criminals stop being violent, using psychology, drugs, surgery, or anything else really. See any crime statistics you like on the subject. The one exception is wherein we can stop someone from being violent, by basically stopping them from doing anything -- not a desirable outcome as applied to the entire human population.
The second reason it's not feasible is, well... What happens to the one guy who finds out about this, and spends a year in his basement becoming completely immune to the vector? People are resistant to gene therapy vectors from time to time, with no deliberate action. Deliberate action just makes this scenario more likely.
Eliminating violence is a nice sentiment, but this methodology is just not even remotely feasible. Ethics are a whole other can of worms.