Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/3/84; site talcott.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!gjk
From: gjk@talcott.UUCP (Greg Kuperberg)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.religion,net.flame
Subject: Re: Re: A Question!
Message-ID: <318@talcott.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 3-Mar-85 15:20:00 EST
Article-I.D.: talcott.318
Posted: Sun Mar  3 15:20:00 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 5-Mar-85 02:35:41 EST
References: <776@decwrl.UUCP> <597@pyuxd.UUCP> <501@whuxl.UUCP>
Organization: Harvard
Lines: 66
Xref: watmath net.politics:7945 net.religion:5849 net.flame:8671

>>> A person who, not so long ago was the idol of millions poised a question
>>> that I would like someone to answer please.
>>> 
>>> "Why shouldn't human beings be as cruel as nature is?"
>>> 
>>>                               - Adolf Hitler
>>> 
>>> Anyone want to try and explain it.  Of course we know religion is bosh and
>>> unscientific and unrational so can the Uzibsmo says stuff.  I mean just
>>> why should humans be DIFFERENT than other things in nature?  [ARNDT]
>> 
>  
>This question already presumes certain things that may not be true.
>One is that nature is *crueler* than human beings. Actually there have never
>been any species (to my knowledge, anybody know differently?) that went
>about systematically murdering other members of their own species.
>Other members of their species may wind up starving to death, being hunted
>by predators and so forth but the members of the species do not dispatch
>their fellows to the gas chamber or such themselves.

This is a myth.  It is now known that many mammalian species actually do
commit murder.  I think primates are the best documented.  Basically,
chimpanzees have organized their society into the equivalent of street
gangs, with terretorial claims and all.  If a lone chimpanzee is at the
wrong place at the wrong time, there is a good chance that he will be
beaten to death.  Since the chimps are perpetually in this state, their
overall murder rate is much higher than that of humans, even including
wars.  See back issues of Discover magazine for more details.
 
>Other species also do not have the peculiar institution of war: as ethologists
>have pointed out, while most species have established forms of agression
>for mating and so forth, a part of these forms is to *stop before murder*.

The reason that they do not have war is lack of sufficient organization.
When there sufficient organization, there can also be war:  a mammalian
body is simply a highly organized colony of eucaryotes, so a fight between
two mammals is a war between colonies of cells.  As to aggression which is
related to mating, the animals have evolved weapons which are usually not
powerful enough for murder, but the intent is to kill.  For example, it
would take a great deal of time and energy for an alpha bull walrus to kill
its challenger, and usually has to settle for bruising it heavily and then
resting or doing something else.

>It would not do the species much good if fighting over mates led to the
>decimation of the protagonists.

True, but it may be in the best interest of the indivual members; see above
paragraph.

>There is also benevolence in nature.  I just saw a "Nature" segment on
>the Osprey falcon: it was very touching to see both mother and father
>build the nest and bring food back to their young.
>  
>Love is a *part* of nature!
>         tim sevener  whuxl!orb

Yes, but the general rule is indifference to anything other than
offspring.  The general rule for humans on the other hand is cooperation,
while murder is usually exceptional enough to make the headlines of the local
papers.  And war is exceptional enough to attract the attention of the whole
world.
---
			Greg Kuperberg
		     harvard!talcott!gjk

"2*x^5-10*x+5=0 is not solvable by radicals." -Evariste Galois.