Humans are born to murder each other

Humans are predisposed to murder each other, new research suggests, although it remains unclear if it’s down to genetics or other factors.
Researchers from Spain have found that a tendency to bump off members of the same species is particularly common among primates, and have estimated that around 2% of human deaths at the origin of our species were down to such lethal spats.
But, the authors add, the impact of society can greatly modify how aggressive humans are, with the proportion of human deaths due to people fighting between themselves fluctuating over mankind’s history.
The findings of the new research is likely to add further fuel to the debate dating from Thomas Hobbes in the 17th century, to contemporary psychologists such as Steven Pinker, the Johnstone professor of psychology at Harvard University, who has previously argued that humans engage in lethal violence as a “natural condition,” but that deaths from such violence have decreased with the rise of modern societies with sophisticated institutions and laws.
The team of researchers from four Spanish institutions sought to unpick the evolutionary contribution to lethal human violence by looking at how commonly a range of different mammals kill members of the same species.
The results revealed that for the ancestor of all mammals, around 1 in every 300 deaths was down to lethal violence between members of the same species. But, the authors note, for evolutionary ancestors of the primates and apes, the figures were higher.
Around 1.8% of deaths are thought to have been down to lethal violence for the ancestor of the great apes, and around 2% for the first humans - a figure more than six times higher than at the origin of mammals.

https://www.theguardian.com/science...-killers-humans-predisposed-to-study-suggests

Study

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

All life is born with some sort of intuition or knowledge, and that must be passive. But, some people are not real, rationalizing the violence of either sort thats not part of reality giving no know to some shadow bodies. Then your passive to these nihilistic natures and you know all along saving Omni from being 1/3 suffering, or evil making him know all along, saving him from ever being fallen by letting impassive and no love go to naught.

Both Death and the grim reaper are nothing. to be passive, and how.
You believe by nature, and you need it to mate. Both miracles.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

All mammals, and most predators, can compete violently and damagingly for breeding status if in question - these animals invariably have evolved honest displays of their weaponry and ability, forestalling injury and death in combat. Humans are almost unique in exhibiting so few certain and visible features of superiority, that can be used to settle questions of status without combat.

Intelligence and coordination and stamina, while central to human lethality as predators and genetic superiority as breeders, are all but invisible. Likewise with capability for cooperation, teamwork. There are ways to display them, maybe, but they are uncertain and prone to interpretation. Maybe we get into real fights in part because we lack an automatic means of avoiding them.

 

Every word here is in English, yet none of the sentences make sense to me.

Can anyone translate?

 

I have the same problem. Ich farschte nichtz

 

Your not afraid? Me neither the all mighty is passive!! Set a dove free.

 

Mayb the complexity of the human brain makes it more susceptable to "defects" which can lead us to killin each other.!!!

 

But sight! Come long to see the real; there's no way you can upend the non-end of the Saigon contrast. Surely you can understand that there's no columns to bear the abrogation of feeling that which grooves to the best beat.

 

Well said!

 

Meerkats.

 

A few references would be good here...

 

Rule 34?

 

...if I could possess someone I would program society to put to death a murderer. Is this the same???

 

Close. It is the intelligence which allows us to murder.

For unintelligent animals fighting other specimen of the own species to death would be a bad strategy. You have to fight with equals, thus, the probability of your own death would be close to 50%.

So what you need to murder? You need cooperation with other specimen, organized so that the victim is isolated. Once one member of the group is isolated, the group can already kill it without much danger for the own life.

So, the other species known to murder is similarly known to be very intelligent - dolphins.

 

But that isn't how murder usually works. Most often there's a single murderer who gets the upper hand by stealth or by superior strength, neither of which requires much intelligence.

 

That weapons have further changed this situation is independent of the argument. Weapons, btw, also require sufficiently high intelligence to be invented.

 

It would be a good thing .

 

Lots of less intelligent animals routinely murder members of their own species. They don't attempt to murder "equals", is the difference - and they can easily tell the difference.

It's easy for most animals to gauge inequality - they have visible size, antlers, teeth they can display, built in physical features and even behaviors directly related to whether or not it's safe for one to try to kill another one, and whether a given individual is in danger.

It's completely normal for bears to murder other bears, each instance being a fight to the death, for example - but it's almost always adult male bears killing cubs and yearlings that have separated from their mothers and have not learned how to avoid the fight. And the reward is obvious and fairly simple - less direct competition for something, reflected in the killer ridding themselves of an irritating presence.

This hazard evaluation is a lot more complicated for humans. So is the reward calculation. So one would expect the error rate to go way up. From this perspective, it's not that we are more intelligent, but that we are less intelligent relative to the complexity of the situation: our intelligence/demand ratio is smaller, not bigger.