Wednesday 15 November 2023

What is Wrong With our Species?

The line between good and evil runs not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either but right through every human heart.” 

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Gulag Archipelago 

Today I’m concerned about the appalling behaviour presented in the news, which is full of stories of the atrocities of two wars. Genocide is featured and even atomic weapons are being considered for use. In particular the slaughter of those in a hospital in Gaza, perpetrated by a people who claim to be “Chosen by God” seems to indicate an alarming blind spot.

These subjects, and the network of other closely linked ideas, cause us to wonder what is wrong with our species, which is acknowledged to be the most brilliant one on Earth. So lets step back to take in a wider perspective.

On a small planet far out in an ordinary galaxy, one species evolved the right set of capacities (e.g. hands, language, social skills, inventiveness, and aggression) to dominate the rest of the biosphere. Nature will try anything, and, like a peacock evolving a fabulous tail, Homo sapiens emerged. 

 

Though human delusion and ego has lead to a persistent claim that we are not animals and are above all other life forms, there can be no doubt of our biological nature. (To deny this is to invoke a Creation in which we sprang fully formed upon the Earth, and this contradicts the evidence.) Though we do have a tendency to over-think everything because of our extremely active cognitive functions, we are biological and run on instinct. An obvious example: In our dimorphic species, it is self-evident that all the feelings and inclinations that lead to reproduction and child-care are instinctual, and that human male instincts differ greatly from those of the female (Rigby & Kulathinal 2015).

As mentioned by others (Benvenuti 2018, Kiley-Worthington 2019, Criscione & Keenan 2019, Schoof & L'Allier 2019), our mass behaviour is irrational. It can only be explained in terms of the universal patterns that have been used by living beings over the aeons, to survive and reproduce within their available habitats (Darwin 1859, Lorenz 1963).

The tendency to regard those in a perceived ‘out-group’ as being inferior to the home group (Chapman & Huffman 2018)—as well as the quest for ever more impressive material possessions—have been identified as an aspects of the territorial instinct (Lorenz 1963), and this is clearly evident in human behaviour.

Not counting animals that kill indirectly by spreading disease, H. sapiens is the species that is most dangerous to humans. A study by the United Nations (2019) determined that about 437,000 people annually are homicide victims, and 90% of the perpetrators are men; their victims are often conspecific females. However, the need for human females to beware of being murdered as they go about their daily lives is never added to the lists of things that make humans exceptional. In terms of murderous behaviour, there is no counterpart in other vertebrates. Humans even kill for entertainment, and this is unquestioningly accepted by the others.

Lorenz (1963) hypothesized that human cruelty is due to the lack of the inhibitions that evolved to control intra-specific aggression in other social animals. Like sharks, animals that have evolved dangerous weapons will also have evolved behavioural strategies to keep them from mortally injuring conspecifics (Lorenz 1963, Klimley et al. 1996). But, when the animal did not evolve its weapons, but invented, there was no selection pressure to develop inhibitions against killing conspecifics. Hence H. sapiens lacks the ability to refrain from using his finely crafted weapons against his fellow man. Though dogs will not bite another who makes the gesture of submission, gunmen do not hesitate to shoot people who are begging for mercy. Individuals of such species can kill others slowly and cruelly in situations in which the victim cannot escape (Lorenz 1963).

Lorenz (1963) presented the possibility that the Christian story about Jesus Christ’s admonition to “turn the other cheek” did not mean that one should submit to more violence, but that one should present the other cheek so that the aggressor could not strike again. Lorenz considered this, along with the ritual of the ‘peace pipe’ (in which a pipe is communally smoked before peace talks), as being efforts by modern humans to control the instinct for conflict and violence (Lorenz 1963).

Though war kills fewer people than homicide, human history is an account of successive wars (Keeley 1996). Tribal warfare was on average 20 times more deadly than modern warfare, calculated as either a percentage of total deaths from war, or as average war deaths each year as a percentage of the population (Keeley 1996). These numbers are echoed by deaths in modern tribal societies in which death rates from war are between four and six times the highest death rates in 20th century Germany or Russia (Keeley 1996). The popularity of war and violence in media entertainment provides further evidence of human instinctive violence.

Benz-Schwarzburg (2018) pointed out that animals do not condemn others as criminals but humans do, citing sexually aggressive dolphins as an example. However, only certain types of violence are condemned by humans. Others are commonly accepted as if they do not count—crimes against conspecifics who are considered to be inferior being just one example. Through decades of experimentation with human subjects, Altemeyer (2006) found that one would only have to ask three or four people before finding someone who says he would be willing to hold you down and electrocute you fattally on the request of a minor authority (Altemeyer 2006).

Zangwill (2021) mentioned that humans have the power to change their behaviour given new information. However, such a capacity is not generally evident. Humans readily avoid facing the facts and will defend their beliefs against them (Kahan et al. 2017). For example, the discoveries concerning the size and nature of the universe (Penrose 2007) and the mysteries concerning the presence of life and of consciousness, are reasons to consider the biosphere on Earth to be remarkable and precious. But the failure to do so is the subject of the target article and all of the accompanying commentaries. How can it be that an intelligent species, one that is exploring the solar system and holds detailed concepts of what to look for as signs of alien life, is destroying the plant cover of its own planet? Given our situation as the dominant species on a delicately balanced planet with nothing but an icy void for an infinity of light years around, the understanding of human biology with the goal of healthy sustainability should have been top priority for decades. It was warned in the 1970s that growth on a planet (with finite resources) cannot continue for long (Meadows et al.1972), but growth did continue and has put the planet into a catastrophic state.

Chapman & Huffman (2018) suggest that we ought to use our powers to effect positive change. But what powers? Assuming that a species can change, what is needed is a complete paradigm shift. In much of human society, however, the prevailing power structure is headed by a military/industrial/political complex that is motivated by financial gain. It is able to use the media to squash or twist any new information that might weaken its interests. If we were actually intelligent, our most learned academics would have been at work for many decades, doing research on the best avenues to take with respect to a sustainable future—avenues implemented by willing leaders.

We may be the only animal that has evolved enough to understand the difference between reasoned thought and instinct. That understanding, in my opinion, is the only thing that can save us from the usual fate that befalls over-populated and highly aggressive species. 

Originally published as a commentary on Chapman &  Huffman (2018): The Elephant in the Garden

A video on the same subject:



Ila France Porcher

 

References

Altemeyer, Bob. (2006) The Authoritarians. Winnipeg: University of Manitoba. Canada.

Benvenuti, Anne (2018) Good news: Humans are neither distinct nor superior. Animal Sentience 23(3)

Benz-Schwarzburg, Judith (2018) We don’t want to know what we know. Animal Sentience 23(12)

Chapman, Colin A. & Huffman, Michael A. (2018) Why do we want to think humans are different? Animal Sentience 23(1)

Criscione, Matthew J. and Keenan, Julian Paul (2019) Our brains make us out to be unique in ways we are not. Animal Sentience 23(38)

Darwin, Charles, & Kebler, Leonard (1859) On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or, The preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. London: J. Murray, 1859.

Keeley, Lawrence H. (1996) War Before Civilization: The Myth of the Peaceful Savage. Oxford University Press, 1996.

Kahan, Dan M., Peters, Ellen, Dawson, Erica C., & Slovic, Paul. (2017). Motivated numeracy and enlightened self-government. Behavioural Public Policy, 1(1), 54-86. doi:10.1017/bpp.2016.2

Kaplan, Gisela (2019) Mirror neurons and humanity’s dark side. Animal Sentience 23(24) DOI: 10.51291/2377-7478.1401

Kiley-Worthington, Marthe (2019) Anthropomorphism is the first step. Animal Sentience 23(30)

Klimley, Abbot Peter., Pyle, Peter., & Anderson, Scot. D. (1996) Tail slap and breach: Agonistic displays among white sharks? In: Klimley AP, Ainley DG, editors. Great White Shark: The Biology of Carcharodon carcharias. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, p 241-55.

Kopnina, Helen (2019) Anthropocentrism: Practical remedies needed. Animal Sentience 23(37)

Lorenz, Konrad. (1963) Das Sogenannte Böse, Zur Naturgeschichte der Aggression by Verlag Dr Borotha-Schoeler, Vienna, Austria.

Meadows, Donella H; Meadows, Dennis L; Randers, Jørgen; Behrens III, William W (1972). The Limits to Growth; A Report for the Club of Rome's Project on the Predicament of Mankind. New York: Universe Books.

Penrose, R. (2007). The Road to Reality: a complete guide to the laws of the universe. 1st Vintage Books ed. New York, Vintage Books.

Rigby, N. and Kulathinal, R.J. (2015), Genetic Architecture of Sexual Dimorphism in Humans. J. Cell. Physiol., 230: 2304-2310.

Schoof, Valérie A. M. and L'Allier, Simon (2019) Mobilizing heads and hearts for wildlife conservation. Animal Sentience 23(42)

United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (2019) Global Study on Homicide. Zangwill, Nick (2021)


No comments:

Post a Comment