partial explanation
Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker
aban57 wrote:Interesting read.
William Buckner (2018) wrote:There is a concern among some social scientists and science writers that providing adaptive and biological explanations for violence has the effect of encouraging such behaviors. Anthropologist Douglas Fry argues that, “Naturalizing war creates an unfortunate self-fulfilling prophecy: If war is natural, then there is little point in trying to prevent, reduce, or abolish it.”
My argument here is that homicide and warfare are very much ‘natural’ behaviors, often tied to male fitness interests; however, such behaviors are sensitive to socioecological cues, and their prevalence can vary significantly across and within societies. Even among chimpanzees, we see significant variation in rates of lethal violence between different communities, even for those located near each other.
An important strength of the behavioral ecology approach to understanding human behavior is that it goes beyond more narrow ideas rooted in genetic determinism or social constructionism. Violence is not ‘innate’ in the sense of being predictably and rigidly determined by genes alone, nor is it the arbitrary result of socialization or cultural learning. Yet violence is nonetheless rooted in human biology, particularly in sex differences between males and females, and the prevalence of violence can vary substantially across and within cultures due to socioecological factors.
In understanding the cross-cultural trends, as well as accounting for the variation, we can better understand both why males everywhere are, on average, more violent than females, as well as how best to reduce the prevalence of violence within our own societies.
zoon wrote:
I definitely appreciate his insistence that features of human behaviour can be shown to be consistent with evolutionary explanations, and to that extent "wired in", without immediately jumping to the conclusion that they are fixed and somehow excusable because they are "natural".
aban57 wrote:zoon wrote:
I definitely appreciate his insistence that features of human behaviour can be shown to be consistent with evolutionary explanations, and to that extent "wired in", without immediately jumping to the conclusion that they are fixed and somehow excusable because they are "natural".
That's probably because too many people don't make the difference between explaining and excusing. Without this insistence he would be accused of the latter.
It will most likely happen anyway.
zoon wrote:Then one can argue that while it may indeed be natural, for example, for a young man to injure another who has disrespected him, it is equally natural for the rest of society not to excuse that behaviour, but instead to operate as a group to identify the offender and make sure that he does not profit in any way from being a disruptive nuisance?
Keep It Real wrote:Sorry, but "why are women less violent than men?"
Keep It Real wrote:No it was directed at the thread title...don't send anything to that old address this year man, I've moved.
Keep It Real wrote:
Oh dear, had to google "Brutus" and am still none the wiser RE the reference. Your prezzie to me last year sure got around tho, my turn? PM boss?
Keep It Real wrote:Oh man, I really won't spell out and rehash all that old beef now....like, why can't we all get along!? You refused to accept a gift from me last year, hopefully, this year you will, is all I'm saying. Made my Xmas in many ways your prezzie did last year...
Ironclad wrote:Males seem more 'ready' to place themselves in danger, than females of this species. Our generally larger bodies are evidence of that readiness; bigger hands for throwing bigger rocks. Males are stronger, faster and die sooner.
There are also more males born in and after times of war, curious fact.
BWE wrote:Ironclad wrote:Males seem more 'ready' to place themselves in danger, than females of this species. Our generally larger bodies are evidence of that readiness; bigger hands for throwing bigger rocks. Males are stronger, faster and die sooner.
There are also more males born in and after times of war, curious fact.
Interesting. I wonder if that makes war more prevalent in 20 year cycles or close to that
jamest wrote:Keep It Real wrote:Oh man, I really won't spell out and rehash all that old beef now....like, why can't we all get along!? You refused to accept a gift from me last year, hopefully, this year you will, is all I'm saying. Made my Xmas in many ways your prezzie did last year...
I don't hate you, dude. You're the first person in two decades whom I offered to meet from online, and you turned me down. This was after helping you out financially. Indeed, you accused me of being a controlling cunt, or suchlike. You don't trust me, obviously. I accept your judgement, and now we're done.
I of course wish you all the best, etc., but I'm moving on. You missed a big fish though, I hope you realise this.
Fallible wrote: (KIR is) Far too intelligent to entertain the ignorant ramblings of some internet weirdo
Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest