Is humankind genetically incapable of stopping violence / wars?

[Ladyhawk]

Dr. Jane Goodall discovered that our closest relatives, chimpanzees, regularly engage in murder and wars. Some wanted to keep this information quiet because it might create the impression that humans are victims of their genetic makeup.

Dr. Goodall thinks people are smart enough to end the violence. I don't. It only takes one chimp to start a war (pun most definitely intended).

What do you think?

[Codeblue]

1. There is no way for me to answer the question as it is now

I believe that many people are incapable of ending conflict, and thus believe that as long as humans are on the planet, there will always be war.

However, I think many people are enlightened enough to end the violence, namely Buddhists. So some people are incapable and some are capable.

[Archae]

2. Even Buddhists get violent.

Every year I see at least one or more news videos of rival Buddhist temples going at each other.

(Last one I saw was fought over tourist dollars, in S Korea.)

I'm a realist, as long as animals and plants exist, there will be agression between them.

From the tiniest critters up to humans.

[Ladyhawk]

4. As I said, it only takes one chimp to start a war.

If one person is still capable of violence, the answer is yes: people are incapable of stopping violence / wars.

I am hoping that someday the people who want to be peaceful outnumber the violent and that someday the peaceful will become our leaders, but I don't think that's a likely scenario. Unfortunately, violent people tend to do very well politically.

[bigbillhaywood]

3. That's thinking like the conservatives

They always say that to justify their military aggression, corporate domination, heartless social policies, etc. They say we're hard-wired to be greedy, violent, etc. Nothing to be done. This is the best of all possible political and economic systems. Bullshit. Don't believe it. Human morality changes. Culture changes. Instinct can be tempered by culture and technology. Systems can be set up to modify behavior and living conditions.

Example: Instinctually we all want to fuck like bunnies (or maybe I'm only speaking for myself, but anyway), various cultures set up the instituion of marriage to regulate breeding and familial relationships. Sure, other animals mate for life, but we have an entire institution set up (which varies from culture to culture) that encompasses everything from tax status, to child rearing, to property rights-- all built up from the simple animal act of screwing-- because we realized early on that procreation needed regulation. Modern technology (including birth control) and advances in our economic system have yet again changed the dynamic-- marraige is no longer as vital in our country as it once was. The point is you can modify instinct.

If we don't believe we can transform human traits and values through our culture, society, institutions and systems, then politically we're all just spinning the wheels here.

[Occulus]

5. No!

Our intellect is the natural balance to our instinct. Prior to us, there was only instinct. Self-awareness was a major leap, and we don't know how it happened, else we would already have or know how to create true artificial intelligence.

We can overcome our violent instincts, just as we overcome our other instincts. One of the most basic of these is the need to urinate. Animals do it wherever in general; some in a specific place for a time and others (like birds) wherever, whenever. Humans, however, 'hold it'; we use a socially agreed place and partition ourselves while we expose our organs. When put that way, stalls seem a bit silly.

Nonetheless, we continue to resist our instinctive reactions, be they to our detriment or our benefit. I'm thinking of two cases in my own life.

The first was when I met a man who ended up being very dishonest. I did what was right and gave him a chance as a friend, but in the end he deceived me and stole away the objects I am now left with only memories of. And this from a person I had opened my home to for a time.

I instinctively knew it was a bad idea, and yet I let him stay there. I resisted my instinct because I knew his circumstances, which were real and visible, and it was to my detriment. In the end, I knew it was all lies.

Another time, when I was much younger, my father was walking down the street with me after a very heavy ice storm. The storm was the worst fall of ice I've ever seen in one evening.

The storm is on record; it was the night of New Year's Eve, 1984-1985. Southwest Michigan experienced an amazing amount of ice. Many, many thousands of people were without power for weeks because it was so damn dangerous to do anything about it until the ice melted.

We were walking down our street admiring the incredible beauty of the ice covering every object in sight in the morning light. I can't begin to describe it.

I didn't hear a sound, but I was looking at the morning sun to the right. Since I wasn't looking up, I wasn't aware of all the big limbs above us. I really should have thought of that, in retrospect, but I'd never seen anything so beautiful in my life (and I mean that. If you've never seen it, when you do, it renders you speechless. Really.), and so I wasn't paying attention to much but the play of the light through the ice and the utter quiet of everything around us. I did hear limbs groaning, but continued walking.

My father slammed his hand down on my shoulder and pulled me back. From nowhere a limb the length of a mobile home and well over a foot thick crashed to the ground not thirty-five feet in front of us.

My father's instinct was to protect his child- me. If we had kept walking, we might have gotten hit with something. If we had move faster from the beginning, and had my father been fearlessly reckless rather than fearfully cautious, we could have been killed. In that case, obeying instinct (ice covering everything = Bad Thing, Stay Home) was the correct thing to do.

We can overcome our instincts to destroy ourselves. We simply need to use our heads in a way that balances our hearts.

[Crunchy Frog]

6. I vote no.

I am very much into primatology, and I do believe that it's findings provide very strong evidence that the tendencies towards violence and war are an inborn part of our natures.

Actually, there is a really good book on that subject called Demonic Males: Apes and the Origins of Human Violence, by Dale Peterson and Richard Wrangham. I think you would find it very interesting.

However, I do not believe in biological determinism. I believe that we as a species have the ability to structure our societies in such a way that these tendencies can be controlled or redirected.

I believe that we have to understand and respect our biological heritage, but that does not mean that we have to remain helpless victims of it.

By the way, I see you've been studying up on your biology. Congratulations.:)