About Stephen Odd Books Odd News Odd Quiz

Illustrations by Rod Clement

 

 

Each month, Dr Stephen Juan will bring you quirky new items from the world of science.

Recent news:

For the full archives click here

ARE WE NATURALLY AGGRESSIVE AND VIOLENT?

Humans are not naturally aggressive and violent.

The latest scientific evidence from a variety of fields shows that human aggression is not a "natural" part of human behaviour any more than the opposite tendency is “natural”. Instead, humans along with non-human primates are as naturally inclined towards peacemaking as they are towards war-making. And this newer view has turned many 1960s and 70s notions on their ear.

Forty years ago, several major works in the then new field of sociobiology proposed the notion of "the killer primate". It was argued that primates, including humans, were "innately" aggressive, violent, fiercely protective of territory and property, and warlike. For example, male Hamadryas baboons fight with each other to obtain or preserve their female harems. Such behaviour was thus assumed to be "natural" and a product of biology, not society. It was then inferred that since human males also have been known to fight over females, this too must be biological. The pessimistic conclusion was then drawn that such aggressive human behaviours could not be "extinguished" by social "conditioning" since they were "ordained and ingrained" as part of "human nature". Thus, we could no more modify our aggressive behaviour than we could alter our eye colour--the gene was the thing in the scheme.

This pessimistic view had its foundations in the earlier writings of Francis Galton, Charles Darwin, Sigmund Freud, among others who promoted the stereotype of the prominence of the "dark side" of human nature. Champions of "the killer primate" view during the 1960s and 70s included Konrad Lorenz, Desmond Morris, Robert Ardrey, and many others. Some studied non-human primates and other animals to reach their conclusions. Many sociobiologist argued that Lorenz's animal field studies alone provided sufficient evidence to sustain "the killer primate" idea and all the pessimistic implications that followed.

Often such conclusions were used to justify the nuclear arms race, the Vietnam War, imperialism, enforced social inequalities, and other violent happenings. Thus, humans were taken off the ethical hook in the face of man's inhumanity to man.

But a new wave of research in sociobiology has dismissed "the killer primate" concept--uncovered the myth of the beast within.

In his meticulously researched books, PEACEMAKING AMONG PRIMATES (1989), BONOBO: THE FORGOTTEN APE (1997), CHIMPANZEE POLITICS: POWER AND SEX AMONG APES (2000), an ethologist from the Regional Primate Research Center of the University of Wisconsin, details how primates make peace as easily as they make war. Presenting evidence on five non-human primate species based upon years of careful observation, Dr. de Waal makes a convincing case that primates, including humans, are essentially peace makers if not peace mongers.

While not denying our history of aggression, Dr. de Waal maintains that the avoidance of aggression is an equally undeniable historical fact, if not more so. What emerges is that warmaking and peacemaking are two hands of the one body--intricately related and both "natural". But just as one hand may dominant the other, so too with behaviour. Aggression or non-aggression can predominate depending upon a variety of factors.

In addition, he argues that we often misunderstand the nature of aggression, non-aggression, and how they interrelate to strike a balance which insures continued social interaction. He writes, "confrontation should not be viewed as a barrier to sociality but rather as an unavoidable element upon which social relationships can be strengthened through reconciliation."

Dr. de Waal presents many examples of this process at work. Chimpanzees reconcile with hugs and kisses after fights. Rhesus monkeys groom the fur of former enemies--literally smoothing differences over. While many non-human primates go to great lengths to stave-off fights, the rare and little known bonobo does something truly remarkable. According to Dr. de Waal, the bonobo uses promiscuous sex independently of reproductive necessities to keep the peace. With bonobos, he writes, "sex occurs in all possible combinations and positions whenever social tensions need to be resolved. `Make love, not war' could be the bonobo slogan."

In AGGRESSION: THE MYTH OF THE BEAST WITHIN (1988), nine scientists, mostly from Cambridge University and writing under the pseudonym of John Klama, provide an excellent example of the reappraisal of sociobiology research to date.

Elegantly countering the arguments and evidence of "the killer primate" advocates, they write, "the conclusion to be drawn from our inquiry into the science and politics of aggression is not that there are pacific angels rather than aggressive monsters inside our heads. We are not fundamentally virtuous beings who have been led astray by evil, any more than we are fundamentally wicked creatures who have somehow stumbled upon good .... We are not devils in false finery, nor yet angels in rags; we are women and men in the world that makes us every moment and that we make and unmake in our thoughts and actions."

The scientists go on to claim that, far from taking humans off the ethical hook by using biology to excuse inhumanity, our responsibility and fate are in our own hands. They write, "future debates on aggression ... need not be about the taming of the beast within ... they can and should concentrate on the exploitation of our natural potential for non-aggression and more cooperative behaviour."

In fact, precisely this last notion is being taken up by many sociobiologists who are quickly modifying their earlier, more pessimistic views. For example, in the revised edition of THE SELFISH GENE by Dr. Richard Dawkins (Oxford University Press, 1989), the London-based author backs-off from many arguments put forward in the first edition of his influential book, published in 1976. Moreover, in the revised edition there is even a new chapter entitled "Nice Guys Finish First" which shows how co-operation can evolve for the benefit of humans--even if we are "selfish" from birth and the world is basically a selfish place.

This newer view is reflected in books such as AGGRESSION AND VIOLENCE (1993) by Richard Felson, BIOLOGY OF VIOLENCE (1999) by David Nichoff, and AGGRESSION AND VIOLENCE (1996) by David Stoff.

Thus, a more sophisticated sociobiology is emerging which is more cautious in its blanket statements about "aggressive" behavioural imperatives and our abilities to alter them.

For the so-called beast within, nature provides no commands when it comes to war or peace. It is we who can choose the claw or the caress.

Can we choose wisely?

Readings
Dawkins, R. (1989) THE SELFISH GENE. Oxford University Press.
De Waal, F. (1989) Peacemaking Among Primates. Harvard University Press.
De Waal, F. (1997) Bonobo: The Forgotten Ape. University of Press.
De Waal, F. (2000) Chimpanzee Politics: Power And Sex Among Apes. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Felson, R. (1993) Aggression And Violence. American Psychological Association.
Klama, J. (1988) Aggression: The Myth Of The Beast Within. John Wiley.
Nichoff, D. (1999) Biology Of Violence. Simon & Schuster.
Stoff, D. (1996) Aggression And Violence. Lea.

 

 

Complete News Archives:

2004

2003

2002

2001

 

Home | About Stephen | Odd Books | Odd News | Odd Quiz | Contact
Copyright HarperCollins Publishers 2002 | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use