Label: Love And War - LW1122 • Format: CD Album • Country: US • Genre: Rock • Style: Hard Rock
Sharing personal information brings people closer together. Verified by Psychology Today. The New Brain. A new study of 1, mammal species has determined which animals are the most vicious killers of their own kind. Killer whales perhaps? Pit bulls maybe? For the answer, just look in the mirror.
The brutal reality could not be more evident or more horrifying. We are the most relentless yet oblivious killers on Earth. Human beings kill anything. Slaughter is a defining behavior of our species. We kill all other creatures, and we kill our own. The enormous industry of print and broadcast journalism serves predominantly to document our killing.
Violence exists in the animal world, of course, but on a far different scale. Carnivores kill for food; we kill our family members, our children, our parents, our spouses, our brothers and sisters, our cousins and in-laws. We kill strangers. We kill people who are different from us, in appearance, beliefs, race, and social status. We kill ourselves in suicide. We kill friends, rivals, Killing For A Living - Love And War - War Rages On , and classmates.
Children kill children, in school and on the playground. Douglas Fields, Why We Snapp. But I was not offering social commentary.
I was providing an objective, zoological description of this species. This week Maria Gomez and colleagues, Zoologists working in Spain, published the results of their in-depth research in a report in the journal Nature on the evolutionary roots of the human propensity to kill their own kind.
The researchers compiled data on lethal violence within 1, species of mammals, and the results verify my description of us. The analysis shows that deaths caused by other members of the same species is responsible for 0. Together with our primate ancestors we stand out as aberrations in our penchant to kill our own kind. The reasons can be traced back to our primate ancestors, which are exceptionally violent creatures, killing each other at a rate of 2.
These data indicate that the incessant repetition throughout recorded history and Killing For A Living - Love And War - War Rages On prehistoric times of murder and war among all cultures of human beings has its roots in our evolutionary stalk.
Across all mammalian species, conspecific deadly violence is highly correlated with these two factors. A double hit of both factors compounds the Masterpiece (1991 New Remix) - D.J.s Gang - Masterpiece. Whales and bats are highly social, but not territorial, for example, and they have very low rates of killing their own kind.
When researchers examined how different types of social groups of humans affect the rate of killing, they found that lethal violence was common in present-day societies organized into bands or tribes, and severe violence is frequent in chiefdoms because of territorial disputes, population and resource pressures, and competition for political reasons, but violence decreased in state-run societies.
Presumably, the authors conclude, this is because socio-political organizations of populations in state-run societies that are designed to suppress violence and respond to it, act to inhibit the innate, genetically-predisposed propensity of people to kill each other.
Consider, for example, if there were no police to call, One Chance - Stan Meissner - One Chance would you have to do? Missing from the analysis, but unquestionably the most important factor in violence among humans and other mammals, is sex. Males boys, men, and the males of other mammalian species are inherently violent, and they are responsible for the vast majority of violent death.
This is a relic of the traditional male role in defending territory and social organization that our human and non-human mammalian ancestors practiced. Understanding this neurocircuitry is vital. Learning about these biologically and genetically embedded triggers of violence can enable us to engage the part of the human brain that distinguishes it from all other mammalian brains--the forebrain.
The nomenclature, sapiensseems an Escher-like ambiguity shifting freely between science and sarcasm. Perhaps this species would be more aptly named Homo nudusthe naked ape, not sapiens. So it seems when miles on the road are marked in incidents of rage--clocked at one every 20 min on average. One wonders when Orlando is no longer Disney. When sun and glitz cease to Killing For A Living - Love And War - War Rages On French Nice.
When skyscrapers are scraped up, as airplanes are mutated into missiles. When houses of worship become slaughterhouses of hate.
When millions flee across the globe from their homes in Syria bombed into a manmade hell on Earth. When a child sits stunned in an ambulance having watched his home and family destroyed by deliberate attack. When a boy trades a handgun for a father and projects his personal pain upon playmates, preferring to become a child murderer.
When police in moments of fear fire first and question later, and when they are picked off by a sniper like points in a pointless video game. Violence is in our genes and in our environment, but so too are territoriality and society. These things we will not change. Genes change at a glacial pace. But territory and society shift constantly and they are molded by man.
There is hope through understanding the science of human violence, as we can see. Some men do deliberate and decide to forfeit their life if necessary to rush into a war zone wearing white helmets to dig a Killing For A Living - Love And War - War Rages On child out of rubble. It is interesting. I would have thought Melodie DAmour (Melody Of Love) - Various - Back To The 50s same as you that population density would correlate with the homicide rate, but the authors draw the opposite conclusion.
Darwin teaches us there is no cooperation withouts some competition. Human beings having no natural predators means Nature rebalances this by having some of us be intra species predators Killing For A Living - Love And War - War Rages On psychopaths and sociopath and sociopath groups including political groups like the Khmer rouge.
Perhaps one way to reduce at least some murderous violence is to spread out more and reduce the population density? We tend to pack ourselves into densely populated cities; don't suburbs and rural areas have fewer murders per capita than cities? I've also read that when a country or geographic group develops an "excess young male" population, that violence increases. I read that young males in particular become more prone to violence when they feel they have no future: no chance of getting a well-paying job, attracting a desirable wife, buying a home and raising a family.
Bleak hopelessness and resentment and a craving for status drives young men to join criminal gangs or to seek status and create meaningfulness in their lives by radicalizing and performing acts of jihad. If I'm remembering correctly, historically when the economy is booming and there are lots of well-paying jobs, a high employment rate, there is less violent crime, less domestic violence, less suicide, less mass murder, etc.
Also: I am not particularly religious but I find it fascinating that the first real crime described in the Bible all three of the Abrahamic religions share the "Old Testament" stories was brother-against-brother murder, committed out of jealousy. Seems we human beings have known this about ourselves, our propensity for extreme violence, for a long time. Domestic violence is a crime committed by men of all social groups, not just the unemployed.
Likewise spree killings and mass murder are usually the result of male narcissists who have very conservative, sexist values and a sense of unfulfilled entitlement to women, wealth, power and social status.
They're not the result of simply unemployment. Religious terrorism is the result of religious ideology, not just social disadvantage. Many terrorists are wealthy, educated and privileged. It seems that mental illness and social disadvantage are the go to excuses for the actions of violent men. However women and girls suffer more from social disadvantage, sexism, depression and poverty, yet don't resort to extreme violence at anywhere near the same rate as men.
So the question remains, is it biological or is it to do with the fact that men are raised with a sense of entitlement to social status and power, and to believe Kończyna O Kończynę - Inkaust - Doba aggression and violence are the answer when they don't get it or when confronted with another male? Men are killing each other at an alarming rate so it would really help to get to the root of the matter.
I don't think this research is honest or helpful cause it can't even make a distinction between male and female levels of violence. Stating that 'human's' are predisposed to violence is very disingenuous on their part and counterproductive if the goal is to understand violence and murder and address it effectively.
I agree. Actually the opposite is true. Sparse population does not stop killings, it encourages them. Feuds were a way of life in the 18th and 19th centuries in the Appalachian Mountains and further west, where law enforcement was scarce and people often took the law into their own hands. Where good law enforcement and a justice system was available, like in cities, killing no longer becomes the only way to get justice.
It is far better to have the state prosecute a killer than to be forced to kill him and any other family member protecting him. No two people, regardless of the kind of environment that they were brought up in and reside in, are the same.
Take two young men who've grown up in a similar environment:. Person A goes out, joins a criminal gang, and gets into criminality himself, and ends up dead or in prison. Person A's going out and getting into crime, and ending up in jail or dead, is due, at least in part because he was reared in a household with criminals, and therefore ended up getting into crime himself, plus, psychologically, he was more prone to criminal behavior.
Person B is brought up and raised in the exact same environment, but instead of getting into crime, he makes an Marathon Acid - Chemistricide - Untitled (File, Album) to become a success in life, stays in school, gets good grades, obtains a scholarship to go to a college that he likes, and ends up becoming a carpenter.
Person B's family is straight as an arrow, with no history or criminality, and they want their kids to have an education and to make something of themselves in life. Both A and B spell the difference between somebody who is successful in life, and who joins a criminal gang, gets into a life of crime, and ends up either dead or behind bars.
Get what I'm saying? I can see what your saying I disagree. This theory doesn't explain why the overwhelming majority of people who kill are male. This can be explained by social factors, such as raising men to believe that aggression and violence are an essential part of 'masculinity', of being a man.
I would like men to stop tarring women with their own brush.