Science Suggests That Humans Are Not Innately Violent And Vicious

[Skarekrow]

Psychological and biological theories of aggression and violence stem from a debate that continues to this day, whether these qualities are innate in humans or not. These contrasting views are found throughout history in the writings of philosophers and scientific thinkers. Many subscribe to the Darwinian idea that violence is at the core of human life, that through competition and fighting to survive, only the fittest of species will move forward, evolve and survive. The purpose of this article is not to examine, dispute or confirm the theory of evolution, it’s to examine the claim that humans are innately vicious, competitive and violent, that these characteristics are burned into our genes.If we take a look at a child from birth, they are unconditionally full of joy and they constantly want to explore and examine the world around them. Human behavior like racism, violence and competition doesn’t seem to be drilled into the genes of humans, it seems to be a learned behavior, dependent on the environment one is surrounded with. Personally, I believe that humans are not burdened with an innate, viciously competitive nature that is encoded into their DNA from birth, I believe these traits are programmed into us via the environment we are surrounded with.What evidence can we draw upon to examine this question? Recent research conducted by Stanford University biologists Robert M. Sapolsky and Lisa J found that even wild baboons, which are among the most aggressive animals on the planet are not genetically mandated to be violent. The study provides the very first field evidence that primates can go the peaceful route, and if aggressive behavior in baboons is a result of cultural traits rather than a biological factor, it could provide some insight into the same phenomenon with human beings, given the fact that our genetics are extremely similar.(0)(2)Primatologists usually characterize learned behavior as cultural traits given the fact that they arise independently of genetic factors. Even though these traits arise independent of genetic factors, they can still be passed on to succeeding generations.“Chimps, who are the closest to humans genetically, offer evidence that violence is not a necessary part of our biology. One species of chimps, the bonobos, create peaceful communities with co-dominant males and females in charge. Unlike other chimps, the community of bonobos operates not with a violence-driven ethic but an ethic that can be described as “make love, not war.” — Greg Braden
If we look at our mass media, movies and video games, violence is abundantly all around us. For most souls on the planet, violence, war and viciousness do not resonate with them, it just doesn’t seem be natural and goes completely against our conscience. If we were able to compare a human being that was raised in a loving environment with one that was raised in a violent environment, the observed behavioral characteristics would both differ.Another argument for the position that violence is not built into our DNA is gene plasticity. This refers to the property of individual genotypes, and their ability to produce different phenotypes when exposed to different environmental conditions.(1) Basically it’s the ability of an organism to change its phenotype in response to changes in the environment. A phenotype is the organisms observable characteristics or traits, like its morphology, biochemical and physiological properties, behavior and more. In clear English, our genes are able to change themselves depending on the environment we surround ourselves with. Our entire biology and chemical processes can be changed depending on our consciousness, how we feel and how we perceive the environment around us. This is also demonstrated in multiple placebo studies that have been conducted.This explanation has been suggested by multiple philosophers and scientists. For example, Thomas Hobbes argued inLeviathan (1651) that humans are naturally violent because of societal laws and their enforcement. He wasn’t the only one, Jacques Rousseau in 1762 hypothesized that the restrictions imposed by society lead to aggression and corrupt behavior. On the other hand, Sigmund Freud would believe that aggressive instincts are an innate quality within human beings.As mentioned earlier primatologists usually characterize learned behavior as cultural traits given the fact that they arise independently of genetic factors. Even though these traits arise independently of genetic factors, they can still be passed on to succeeding generations.“Most human violence is neither necessary nor is it an inherent, genetic, “animal” survival skill. We have the ability , and I believe an evolutionary mandate, to stop violence. The best way to stop it is to realize that we are spiritual beings who need love as much as we need food. Survival of the most loving is the only ethic that will ensure not only a healthy personal life but also a health planet” — Greg Braden
Science has yet to prove that violence is built into our DNA. In fact, most of the science available suggests that it’s not, that these are learned behaviors given the surrounding environment. Do you really think a baby born in a utopian type world, where there is no scarcity, where everybody’s needs are met, where there is no television portraying violence, and no war, that it would grow up displaying characteristics of violence?At the end of the day, all of us have a choice. Consider yourself as a tank of gasoline, and pretend that the world is full of matches ready to light you on fire (make you angry). All you have to do is empty your gas, so there is no fuel for the flame. You’re always in control, you always have a choice, you dictate your reality with your thoughts, actions and reactions. It’s no longer survival of the fittest, it’s survival of the most loving. Anger, aggression and other similar qualities are all products of the ego, the mind. Sure, violence and anger are characteristics that can present themselves within all of us, but it’s always our choice. Sources:
(0)Lipton, H Bruce. The Biology of Belief. United States: Hay House INC. 2008
Lipton, H Bruce. The Biology of Belief. United States: Hay House INC. 2008 — See more at: http://www.collective-evolution.com...-really-physical-at-all/#sthash.ACTJJwD5.dpuf
(1)http://jeb.biologists.org/content/209/12/2362.full
(2)http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.0020106
http://www.haverford.edu/library/reference/mschaus/ICPR281/baker_psychology_acs.pdf
Lipton, H Bruce. The Biology of Belief. United States: Hay House INC. 2008 — See more at: http://www.collective-evolution.com...-really-physical-at-all/#sthash.dTszrTwI.dpuf


What do you think???

 

[Skarekrow]

Psychological and biological theories of aggression and violence stem from a debate that continues to this day, whether these qualities are innate in humans or not. These contrasting views are found throughout history in the writings of philosophers and scientific thinkers. Many subscribe to the Darwinian idea that violence is at the core of human life, that through competition and fighting to survive, only the fittest of species will move forward, evolve and survive. The purpose of this article is not to examine, dispute or confirm the theory of evolution, it’s to examine the claim that humans are innately vicious, competitive and violent, that these characteristics are burned into our genes.If we take a look at a child from birth, they are unconditionally full of joy and they constantly want to explore and examine the world around them. Human behavior like racism, violence and competition doesn’t seem to be drilled into the genes of humans, it seems to be a learned behavior, dependent on the environment one is surrounded with. Personally, I believe that humans are not burdened with an innate, viciously competitive nature that is encoded into their DNA from birth, I believe these traits are programmed into us via the environment we are surrounded with.What evidence can we draw upon to examine this question? Recent research conducted by Stanford University biologists Robert M. Sapolsky and Lisa J found that even wild baboons, which are among the most aggressive animals on the planet are not genetically mandated to be violent. The study provides the very first field evidence that primates can go the peaceful route, and if aggressive behavior in baboons is a result of cultural traits rather than a biological factor, it could provide some insight into the same phenomenon with human beings, given the fact that our genetics are extremely similar.(0)(2)Primatologists usually characterize learned behavior as cultural traits given the fact that they arise independently of genetic factors. Even though these traits arise independent of genetic factors, they can still be passed on to succeeding generations.“Chimps, who are the closest to humans genetically, offer evidence that violence is not a necessary part of our biology. One species of chimps, the bonobos, create peaceful communities with co-dominant males and females in charge. Unlike other chimps, the community of bonobos operates not with a violence-driven ethic but an ethic that can be described as “make love, not war.” — Greg BradenIf we look at our mass media, movies and video games, violence is abundantly all around us. For most souls on the planet, violence, war and viciousness do not resonate with them, it just doesn’t seem be natural and goes completely against our conscience. If we were able to compare a human being that was raised in a loving environment with one that was raised in a violent environment, the observed behavioral characteristics would both differ.Another argument for the position that violence is not built into our DNA is gene plasticity. This refers to the property of individual genotypes, and their ability to produce different phenotypes when exposed to different environmental conditions.(1) Basically it’s the ability of an organism to change its phenotype in response to changes in the environment. A phenotype is the organisms observable characteristics or traits, like its morphology, biochemical and physiological properties, behavior and more. In clear English, our genes are able to change themselves depending on the environment we surround ourselves with. Our entire biology and chemical processes can be changed depending on our consciousness, how we feel and how we perceive the environment around us. This is also demonstrated in multiple placebo studies that have been conducted.This explanation has been suggested by multiple philosophers and scientists. For example, Thomas Hobbes argued inLeviathan (1651) that humans are naturally violent because of societal laws and their enforcement. He wasn’t the only one, Jacques Rousseau in 1762 hypothesized that the restrictions imposed by society lead to aggression and corrupt behavior. On the other hand, Sigmund Freud would believe that aggressive instincts are an innate quality within human beings.As mentioned earlier primatologists usually characterize learned behavior as cultural traits given the fact that they arise independently of genetic factors. Even though these traits arise independently of genetic factors, they can still be passed on to succeeding generations.“Most human violence is neither necessary nor is it an inherent, genetic, “animal” survival skill. We have the ability , and I believe an evolutionary mandate, to stop violence. The best way to stop it is to realize that we are spiritual beings who need love as much as we need food. Survival of the most loving is the only ethic that will ensure not only a healthy personal life but also a health planet” — Greg BradenScience has yet to prove that violence is built into our DNA. In fact, most of the science available suggests that it’s not, that these are learned behaviors given the surrounding environment. Do you really think a baby born in a utopian type world, where there is no scarcity, where everybody’s needs are met, where there is no television portraying violence, and no war, that it would grow up displaying characteristics of violence?At the end of the day, all of us have a choice. Consider yourself as a tank of gasoline, and pretend that the world is full of matches ready to light you on fire (make you angry). All you have to do is empty your gas, so there is no fuel for the flame. You’re always in control, you always have a choice, you dictate your reality with your thoughts, actions and reactions. It’s no longer survival of the fittest, it’s survival of the most loving. Anger, aggression and other similar qualities are all products of the ego, the mind. Sure, violence and anger are characteristics that can present themselves within all of us, but it’s always our choice. Sources:(0)Lipton, H Bruce. The Biology of Belief. United States: Hay House INC. 2008Lipton, H Bruce. The Biology of Belief. United States: Hay House INC. 2008 — See more at: http://www.collective-evolution.com...-really-physical-at-all/#sthash.ACTJJwD5.dpuf(1)http://jeb.biologists.org/content/209/12/2362.full(2)http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.0020106http://www.haverford.edu/library/reference/mschaus/ICPR281/baker_psychology_acs.pdfLipton, H Bruce. The Biology of Belief. United States: Hay House INC. 2008 — See more at: http://www.collective-evolution.com...-really-physical-at-all/#sthash.dTszrTwI.dpuf What do you think???

 

[Skarekrow]

Duplicate thread...please delete [MENTION=2240]rawr[/MENTION]
Thank you

 

[Eventhorizon]

Interesting. I personally believe through what I have learned that the universe is a hostile place and that in order to survive in it, we as humans have had to be aggressive. Its been bred into us by the universe. In fact, our brain power would not be possible without the added energy that comes from eating meat as opposed to plants etc.

http://greatist.com/health/eating-meat-build-brain-121112

Given this, we might want to be a little worried should aliens show up on our doorstep.

 

[Skarekrow]

Interesting. I personally believe through what I have learned that the universe is a hostile place and that in order to survive in it, we as humans have had to be aggressive. Its been bred into us by the universe. In fact, our brain power would not be possible without the added energy that comes from eating meat as opposed to plants etc.

http://greatist.com/health/eating-meat-build-brain-121112

Given this, we might want to be a little worried should aliens show up on our doorstep.

You cannot necessarily equate eating meat with being violent...in fact, many ancient cultures were very respectful of killing animals in order to sustain themselves...they did it with the utmost gratitude.

 

[Rcs6r]

Wait... people think humans are innately violent?!

You cannot necessarily equate eating meat with being violent...in fact, many ancient cultures were very respectful of killing animals in order to sustain themselves...they did it with the utmost gratitude.

If my college anthropology class taught me anything, it's that this above statement is true.

 

[Skarekrow]

Wait... people think humans are innately violent?!




If my college anthropology class taught me anything, it's that this above statement is true.

So was it a slow infiltration of violence being acceptable and a “normal” part of us as humans and a society by Type-A sociopaths?
Was it greed that brought it on? The need to wield the most power over another?
Was there a certain point in history that was a turning point for the human race?
I believe we can work our way back to that point of violence being looked upon as something abnormal...but I think it first needs to begin at home in how parents raise their children...still, perhaps not...maybe we are too far gone with the violent video games, movies, etc.?

 

[ThomasJ79]

I do think there are certain character traits that make some people more prone to violence, such as those with lower empathy and higher levels are aggression. Such people have lower inhibitions and cannot control themselves as easily as those that have them. This creates a higher probability that they will commit a violent act. Personally, I do not understand violent people. How can they not control themselves? How do they not think of other people before acting? They do exist. The ones that cannot be reformed are those that have such a high probability of committing violent acts. They even use religion and emotional manipulation as a tool to deceive others into believing they are reformed. I wish these people did not exist, but that is part of the reality of human nature.

 

[muir]

Interesting. I personally believe through what I have learned that the universe is a hostile place and that in order to survive in it, we as humans have had to be aggressive. Its been bred into us by the universe. In fact, our brain power would not be possible without the added energy that comes from eating meat as opposed to plants etc.

http://greatist.com/health/eating-meat-build-brain-121112

Given this, we might want to be a little worried should aliens show up on our doorstep.

what if the aliens have already been here and implanted their DNA into us?

Don Juan, the Mexican Yaqui Indian shaman, tells Carlos Castaneda the following:
“We have a predator that came from the depths of the cosmos and took over the rule of our lives. Human beings are its prisoners. The Predator is our lord and master. It has rendered us docile, helpless. If we want to protest, it suppresses our protest. If we want to act independently, it demands that we don’t do so… I have been beating around the bush all this time, insinuating to you that something is holding us prisoner. Indeed we are held prisoner!
“This was an energetic fact for the sorcerers of ancient Mexico … They took us over because we are food for them, and they squeeze us mercilessly because we are their sustenance. just as we rear chickens in chicken coops, the predators rear us in human coops, humaneros. Therefore, their food is always available to them.”
“No, no, no, no,” [Carlos replies] “This is absurd don Juan. What you’re saying is something monstrous. It simply can’t be true, for sorcerers or for average men, or for anyone.”
“Why not?” don Juan asked calmly. “Why not? Because it infuriates you? … You haven’t heard all the claims yet. I want to appeal to your analytical mind. Think for a moment, and tell me how you would explain the contradictions between the intelligence of man the engineer and the stupidity of his systems of beliefs, or the stupidity of his contradictory behaviour. Sorcerers believe that the predators have given us our systems of belief, our ideas of good and evil, our social mores. They are the ones who set up our hopes and expectations and dreams of success or failure. They have given us covetousness, greed, and cowardice. It is the predators who make us complacent, routinary, and egomaniacal.”
“‘But how can they do this, don Juan? [Carlos] asked, somehow angered further by what [don Juan] was saying. “‘Do they whisper all that in our ears while we are asleep?”
“‘No, they don’t do it that way. That’s idiotic!” don Juan said, smiling. “They are infinitely more efficient and organized than that. In order to keep us obedient and meek and weak, the predators engaged themselves in a stupendous manoeuvre 
stupendous, of course, from the point of view of a fighting strategist. A horrendous manoeuvre from the point of view of those who suffer it. They gave us their mind! Do you hear me? The predators give us their mind, which becomes our mind. The predators’ mind is baroque, contradictory, morose, filled with the fear of being discovered any minute now.”
“I know that even though you have never suffered hunger… you have food anxiety, which is none other than the anxiety of the predator who fears that any moment now its manoeuvre is going to be uncovered and food is going to be denied. Through the mind, which, after all, is their mind, the predators inject into the lives of human beings whatever is convenient for them. And they ensure, in this manner, a degree of security to act as a buffer against their fear.”
“The sorcerers of ancient Mexico were quite ill at ease with the idea of when [the predator] made its appearance on Earth. They reasoned that man must have been a complete being at one point, with stupendous insights, feats of awareness that are mythological legends nowadays. And then, everything seems to disappear, and we have now a sedated man. What I’m saying is that what we have against us is not a simple predator. It is very smart, and organized. It follows a methodical system to render us useless. Man, the magical being that he is destined to be, is no longer magical. He’s an average piece of meat.”
“There are no more dreams for man but the dreams of an animal who is being raised to become a piece of meat: trite, conventional, imbecilic.”
Castaneda, 1998

 

[muir]

I do think there are certain character traits that make some people more prone to violence, such as those with lower empathy and higher levels are aggression. Such people have lower inhibitions and cannot control themselves as easily as those that have them. This creates a higher probability that they will commit a violent act. Personally, I do not understand violent people. How can they not control themselves? How do they not think of other people before acting? They do exist. The ones that cannot be reformed are those that have such a high probability of committing violent acts. They even use religion and emotional manipulation as a tool to deceive others into believing they are reformed. I wish these people did not exist, but that is part of the reality of human nature.

I was watching a spy thriller recently called 'tinker, tailor, soldier, spy' that was based on a John Le Carre novel

In it the spymaster says to another spy that fanatics always harbour a secret doubt

I thought that was interesting....like a shadow side

I think we are not naturally violent but i think we have the potential for violence within us. So to deny violence would be to repress it and it would then become part of my shadow

I am not naturally violent...i don't wish violence on anyone....but i am capable of violence under certain conditions. I think that is probably true for most people

I think we in the west have been living in a war economy since world war 1 and certain special interests have a lot invested in the continuation of violence; they act as pushers of violence

 

[Skarekrow]

I do think there are certain character traits that make some people more prone to violence, such as those with lower empathy and higher levels are aggression. Such people have lower inhibitions and cannot control themselves as easily as those that have them. This creates a higher probability that they will commit a violent act. Personally, I do not understand violent people. How can they not control themselves? How do they not think of other people before acting? They do exist. The ones that cannot be reformed are those that have such a high probability of committing violent acts. They even use religion and emotional manipulation as a tool to deceive others into believing they are reformed. I wish these people did not exist, but that is part of the reality of human nature.

So how do you think a trait that is generally looked upon in a negative light come to be so incorporated into just about every aspect of our society?

 

[Flavus Aquila]

"Science suggests that humans are not innately violent and vicious."

I suggest that evidence universally suggests the contrary. Turn on any news channel from any part of the world in which humans are found and you will find viciousness and even violence.

 

[Skarekrow]

"Science suggests that humans are not innately violent and vicious."

I suggest that evidence universally suggests the contrary. Turn on any news channel from any part of the world in which humans are found and you will find viciousness and even violence.

Yes...but is that because that is all we are being shown?
Is that because we are a product of nurture vs nature or the other way around?

 

[Flavus Aquila]

Yes...but is that because that is all we are being shown?
Is that because we are a product of nurture vs nature or the other way around?

Our nature is to be nurtured for a large number of our early years, so such distinctions don't have any relevant point.

Every human culture and society has a very vicious history. All we can do is try to resist such tendencies, or give into them, because it also seems to be human nature to want to rise above viciousness and violence.

 

[Skarekrow]

Our nature is to be nurtured for a large number of our early years, so such distinctions don't have any relevant point.

Every human culture and society has a very vicious history. All we can do is try to resist such tendencies, or give into them, because it also seems to be human nature to want to rise above viciousness and violence.

In the human fossil and archeological record there is no good evidence of intense aggression and warfare until very recently, and it is associated with the advent of permanent settlements, agriculture, and social stratification. Increased social inequality and more complex political and economic systems seem to correlate with more types of aggression and violence in human societies. Interestingly, these scenarios also correlate with larger and more complex peaceful relationships amongst and between peoples.

Humans can, and do, engage in a wide variety of aggression. However, aggression is not our primary “go to” behavior as successful organisms. There is insufficient evidence to argue that we have evolved a suite of specifically aggressive behaviors to succeed in the world. In fact, it is largely our abilities to get along and to negotiate complex social problems, with and without aggression, that make humans one of the most successful species on this planet.

Aggression is not a single trait...or an easily described behavioral system. It is not a thing that has evolved as a package, but rather it is a suite of behaviors that has a dynamic and complicated range of expression.
Anthropologists, biologists and psychologists have shown different behaviors and patterns of “aggression” when defending yourself versus when planning an attack, from mothers defending their infants, from predators chasing prey, in fear-induced aggression, in sex-related aggression, and in territorial aggression.

Do you think eventually we will rise above this innate “nature” if is actually exists, or will we burn our race down into a smoldering pile of ash?

 

[Rcs6r]

Was there a certain point in history that was a turning point for the human race?

Not just one point, but I'd say multiple points occurring all the time, every time there's a huge breakthrough in technology and production. Of course the turning point was the development of agriculture, which we all know allowed man kind to settle in permanent locations on river and lakesides and develop cities as populations grew.

Larger populations also = more competition as there are more mouths to feed, bodies to shelter, etc. Humans seem to only become violent when a 'need' is not being met, and fulfilling that need becomes too great to bear. So you use tactics against others to get what you 'need' (or want). Semi-related, it reminds me of the Salem Witch Trials, where people used lies and superstition to have their neighbors killed for property.

 

[Rcs6r]

I think we in the west have been living in a war economy since world war 1 and certain special interests have a lot invested in the continuation of violence; they act as pushers of violence

War is a money maker for manufacturing. Weapons to defend ourselves, or to give advantage in claiming land over a weaker army, for one thing.

 

[muir]

War is a money maker for manufacturing. Weapons to defend ourselves, or to give advantage in claiming land over a weaker army, for one thing.

Its a disaster for society though because to get the money to pay the manufacturers they have to borrow money indebting the country

Then the soldiers that have to do the dirty work are recruited form the people and then their families have to deal with the fallout whether they come back or not

Its just a bad deal for everyone except the war profiteers

 

[Skarekrow]

Not just one point, but I'd say multiple points occurring all the time, every time there's a huge breakthrough in technology and production. Of course the turning point was the development of agriculture, which we all know allowed man kind to settle in permanent locations on river and lakesides and develop cities as populations grew.

Larger populations also = more competition as there are more mouths to feed, bodies to shelter, etc. Humans seem to only become violent when a 'need' is not being met, and fulfilling that need becomes too great to bear. So you use tactics against others to get what you 'need' (or want). Semi-related, it reminds me of the Salem Witch Trials, where people used lies and superstition to have their neighbors killed for property.

War is a money maker for manufacturing. Weapons to defend ourselves, or to give advantage in claiming land over a weaker army, for one thing.

Its a disaster for society though because to get the money to pay the manufacturers they have to borrow money indebting the country

Then the soldiers that have to do the dirty work are recruited form the people and then their families have to deal with the fallout whether they come back or not

Its just a bad deal for everyone except the war profiteers

So how can we all be so blind?
Did we as a society become too complacent in our lives of TV and movies, disconnection from personal relationships, and apathy to the pain we cause others in our race to preserve ourselves by any means necessary?
When did the idea of bettering oneself supersede the betterment of the human race?
(when I say bettering oneself I mean it in the most selfish of terms)
How can we get people to open their eyes in a world that is so over saturated by people speaking in the opposite manner?

 

[Flavus Aquila]

In the human fossil and archeological record there is no good evidence of intense aggression and warfare until very recently, and it is associated with the advent of permanent settlements, agriculture, and social stratification. Increased social inequality and more complex political and economic systems seem to correlate with more types of aggression and violence in human societies. Interestingly, these scenarios also correlate with larger and more complex peaceful relationships amongst and between peoples.

Humans can, and do, engage in a wide variety of aggression. However, aggression is not our primary “go to” behavior as successful organisms. There is insufficient evidence to argue that we have evolved a suite of specifically aggressive behaviors to succeed in the world. In fact, it is largely our abilities to get along and to negotiate complex social problems, with and without aggression, that make humans one of the most successful species on this planet.

Aggression is not a single trait...or an easily described behavioral system. It is not a thing that has evolved as a package, but rather it is a suite of behaviors that has a dynamic and complicated range of expression.
Anthropologists, biologists and psychologists have shown different behaviors and patterns of “aggression” when defending yourself versus when planning an attack, from mothers defending their infants, from predators chasing prey, in fear-induced aggression, in sex-related aggression, and in territorial aggression.

Do you think eventually we will rise above this innate “nature” if is actually exists, or will we burn our race down into a smoldering pile of ash?

The fossil record doesn't show much evidence of waring till recently? Well civilisation is a fairly recent thing, which means that organised armed forces are as well. However, primitive cultures did not largely disappear until recently - and from them there is ample evidence of very violent lifestyles. Here in Australia, the Aborigines had ritualised in-tribe violence in the form of very injurious rites of initiation; as well as having very aggressive dealings with neighbouring tribes. (The Australian Aborigines have been isolated geographically for at least 40,000 years). Nevertheless, very similar practices were found in Papua New Guinea, Africa, North and South America, and between the Pacific Islanders. All-out warfare may have been rare, given that most of the time tribes would keep to their territories, but there was certainly a very violent defense of territories, or nomadic groups. Indeed, historical records show that in the north of Australia, about 25% of male Aborigines would die in inter-tribal conflict.

I personally don't think we are likely to rise above our violent natures as a species - perhaps as individuals. But this does not think that this spells out our doom. I think it just means that we need to be realistic and prudent about our tendencies and see that they are directed/harnessed in a constructive, not destructive way.