read Professor R. Brian Ferguson's new book on chimpanzee violence. In "Chimpanzees, War, and History," R. Brian Ferguson challenges this consensus. By historically contextualizing every reported chimpanzee killing, Ferguson ....
Is it possible that responses such as appropriate friendliness, appropriate aggression, coöperation (win-win), curiosity are the product of the ability to accurately assess output of what is perceived to be unfamiliar/ the other/ the outsider/the outgroup member? Is the ability to accurately assess otherness and its corresponding intention (unfamiliar output) not a sign of social intelligence (higher reasoning)? Is it possible that dogs have (through evolution) an impeccable ability in assessing human behavioural output (such as pointing a finger, eye movements) and that they are less inclined to respond with distrust/aggression? If so, is this ability restricted to human output? Dogs seem to be active observers.. So maybe..it's not the survival of the friendliest, but the survival of the most socially intelligent. Thus, those socially adventurous human types that are uninhibited by the illusion of threatening otherness or a loss of their social identity ( "human", "world-citizen", earth-citizen, universalist, humanist, etc)
I disagree war is an intellectualized expression of empathy. The film about the family living next to the death camp would make that family hyper empathic, under such an analysis.
I assume bononbos have always been who they are. Similarly to humanities first 250,000 years. Matriarchal. In reality the individuals put each other first. Chimpanzees are bonobos thrust into conditions forcing them to learn to be selfish. The culture flipped to patriarchal and violent rule by the patriarchy became the rule of law. Humans became selfish only at the dawn of agriculture. Bonobos can share with strangers. So can humans, stil.
Let's not pretend it hasn't been bastardized to mean survival of the strongest and the most dominant. For one, the actual darwinian quote is "survival of the fit". "Survival of the fittest" was coined by Herbert Spencer, who also coined the term "social darwinism", so you can see how this perspective of survival of the friendliest is needed?
Wow Brian Hare is a fascinating speaker.
so thAts why i have such a hard time with survival
📍54:27
and the humans who were the friendliest to the wolves also gained an advantage
read Professor R. Brian Ferguson's new book on chimpanzee violence. In "Chimpanzees, War, and History," R. Brian Ferguson challenges this consensus. By historically contextualizing every reported chimpanzee killing, Ferguson ....
Is it possible that responses such as appropriate friendliness, appropriate aggression, coöperation (win-win), curiosity are the product of the ability to accurately assess output of what is perceived to be unfamiliar/ the other/ the outsider/the outgroup member?
Is the ability to accurately assess otherness and its corresponding intention (unfamiliar output) not a sign of social intelligence (higher reasoning)?
Is it possible that dogs have (through evolution) an impeccable ability in assessing human behavioural output (such as pointing a finger, eye movements) and that they are less inclined to respond with distrust/aggression?
If so, is this ability restricted to human output?
Dogs seem to be active observers..
So maybe..it's not the survival of the friendliest, but the survival of the most socially intelligent. Thus, those socially adventurous human types that are uninhibited by the illusion of threatening otherness or a loss of their social identity ( "human", "world-citizen", earth-citizen, universalist, humanist, etc)
Lecture starts at 03:52
I disagree war is an intellectualized expression of empathy. The film about the family living next to the death camp would make that family hyper empathic, under such an analysis.
I assume bononbos have always been who they are. Similarly to humanities first 250,000 years. Matriarchal. In reality the individuals put each other first. Chimpanzees are bonobos thrust into conditions forcing them to learn to be selfish. The culture flipped to patriarchal and violent rule by the patriarchy became the rule of law. Humans became selfish only at the dawn of agriculture. Bonobos can share with strangers. So can humans, stil.
survival of the fittest is nothing to do with the things mentioned in the header. it's about adaptation to the environment.
@jedtattum9996 - Working together helps the group to survive in the environment. I think that's the point - i is far better not to be alone.
Let's not pretend it hasn't been bastardized to mean survival of the strongest and the most dominant.
For one, the actual darwinian quote is "survival of the fit". "Survival of the fittest" was coined by Herbert Spencer, who also coined the term "social darwinism", so you can see how this perspective of survival of the friendliest is needed?