Of War, Slaughter, and Human Nature

[John Kilduff]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
When two groups of baboons are in dispute of a territory, they will literally tear each-other apart.

When the baboons evolve over a million years and start wearing clothes and invent weapons, like swords and guns, would they stop killing each-other over territorial disputes?

When these dressed primates that we call humans are slaughtering each-other, they are just behaving according to the way they are programed by their genes.

[/ QUOTE ]

I had a dispute with my neighbor. Instead of slaughtering him, I knocked on his door and we talked it out. Why didn't our genes force us to tear each other apart?

[/ QUOTE ]

Can't humans possess a trait without it being overpowering in all circumstances? I don't see any reasons why humans cannot have some traits which at times push humans in different directions - even in opposite directions - from other traits which they also possess.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, that's possible. But if you read what I was actually responding to:

[ QUOTE ]
When the baboons evolve over a million years and start wearing clothes and invent weapons, like swords and guns, would they stop killing each-other over territorial disputes?

[/ QUOTE ]

The answer is clearly "yes", since I didn't kill anyone when my neighbor put his garbage can on my side of the property line.

[ QUOTE ]
I think you're trying to argue that human nature is not ALWAYS inherently savage - and of course I agree.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait, if something is inherent, then it is always inherent. That's what inherent means. "Existing as an essential constituent or characteristic; intrinsic."

[ QUOTE ]
Also, your example is complicated and tainted by the fact that the aplication of your intelligence to the problem leads to the conclusion that it is in your best interest to resolve the matter peaceably. That of course may in turn depend on the fact that the two of you are in modern society and not stranded on a desert island somewhere forever with perhaps only a tiny village.

[/ QUOTE ]

If such traits of peacible existence are so easily developed, their opposites can hardly be an intrinsic part of human nature.

[ QUOTE ]
How far off is Lord of the Flies from human nature?

[/ QUOTE ]

How far? I dunno, but it's clearly greater than "zero".

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think it is spot on but I don't think such things can be ruled out of human nature either. And history has shown an immense amount of ruthlessness and savagery through the ages.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nobody disputes history. We can come up with all sorts of activities that have been repeated millions of times through the ages. There's an immense amount of bloodletting throughout the ages. Human nature? How about belief in a geocentric universe? Human nature?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know. I don't see any reason why humans cannot have intrinsic qualities that are incongruous with or opposite from other intrinsic qualities that they may possess. Why can't humans have both the instinctual urges to help others and to harm others? The human entity is complex enough that I don't see why opposite qualities cannot both be present.

Conditions may then help determine which qualities come to the forefront. This should give humans capability to deal with wide ranges of situations. Responses may not always be appropriate or optimal for a given situation, but at least the options are there. Animals have both nurturing cooperative instincts as well as savage ruthless fighting instincts. I don't see why humans can't have the same.