Agreed and well put!

Thanks Albert.

And Cap'n - I don't want to start rumers so I should clarify. Those stats apply strictly to the infantry. Firing and killing rates have always been higher among the airforce (due to physical distance from the victim), and artillery (due to shared responsiblity and group absolution of these "teamwork" weapons). Also does not apply to some of the horrible attrocities and ethnic war crimes (due to moral distance from the victim).
I have seen lectures given by Grossman and he compares our aversion to harming each other to horned animals that fight members of their own species by ramming head-on against the stongest part of their oponent's body but who will attact a member of another species from the side with a horn in their belly. Piranas hit each other with their tails but will set their teeth to anything else that hits the water, and the only animal a rattlesnake will not bite is another rattlesnake.
In his conclusion he points out that the same techniques used to "take the safety catch off" of modern soldiers to make them more efficient, are present in the media and videogames our children are watching and playing.
Now there's a scary thought for you to think about Bev :eek: .

- Chad

Thanks for the clarification and further info. I can easily see how proximity to the victims would play a huge role in the ease of killing the target. Imagine what had to hand combat must have been like for the foot soldiers before the intruduction of firearms. Great cross-references from nature as well.

I agree with Grossman about the media and it's desensitizing effects, especially on children. Have you ever noticed in a movie theatre more people wince when a dog or cat is harmed than when a person is? I don't think this is because we care more for our pets than our fellow man, we're just used to seeing our fellow man get tortured. This is one of the reasons we don't watch TV or play violent video games in our home.

Did you see the clip of the American soldier describing how listening to music in his helmet served to take him away from the action, make it more like a video game, make it fun? That's straight out of "Starship Troopers". I mean the book, not the cheesey movie.

Are you referring to the interview with the American soldiers in Iraq present on Micheal Moore's pseudo-edu/propoganda-documentary?

So it doesn't surprise me about reports that some soldiers enjoy killing unarmed civilians in Iraq.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6682913/

There have always been animals that have been at the top of the evolutionary ladder, but they haven't gotten into the same troubles we have. There have always been natural checks and balances in place to prevent one species from taking over the planet at the expense of all other species.

Take, for instance, the African lion (before humans came along). Lions would eat well and populations thrive if there was abundant food brought about by good grazing and other positive factors for the prey species. However, lions have never eaten all the prey species for some reason, even though they were at the top of the heap in their environment, so there would always be some lions and some prey species.

Here I segue into a discussion about humans..... If humans are so smart, and if we're at the top of the evolutionary ladder, why are we inadvertantly killing so many other species, and damaging our planet by overpopulation and pollution? Is it because we have no natural predators? And why don't the same checks and balances that occur between lions and prey not apply to us? I guess if I think about this long enough, I may find my own answer.....

Okay, I've thought enough :razz: Perhaps we've run rampant over the planet because there are no natural checks and balances for us - yet. Remember, as a species, we've been here a relatively short period of time. Sure, we've suffered the Black Death a few centuries back when a good portion of Europe was killed off. Then at the end of WWI, there was the Spanish Influenza which killed millions. Now there is AIDS, which is still wreaking worldwide havoc despite promising new drugs. And scientists are still concerned that another catastrophic flu, not unlike the Spanish Influenza, is ready to hit hard any year now especially with gobal travel as prevelant as it is today. Maybe disease is going to be our natural check and balance.

However, even with all the pollution, people in the post-industrialized world are living longer than ever before. Geez, I just don't get it. Are we that smart that we hink we can keep going forever and ever and not suffer the consequences of our actions? Are we the new lion, but a lion that will devour all they prey species until there is nothing left? Is Earth going to become another Easter Island? Not that I think you are saying that, Chad.... I'm going off on a tangent here.

Yes, I think we all feel somewhat guilty, though by judging from some of the posts in this thread, some will feel it much more than others. However, I want to say that we do not know if other animals feel guilty for some of their actions. Indeed, perhaps some animals do, and others don't. We do not know for sure what other beings feel because we have no true way of measuring their feelings or lack thereof.

Anyway, interesting thread. Glad it's being allowed to continue. We can be intellectual here for awhile and get to read a broad range of thoughts on a variety of issues.

But, really, I gotta go feed the fish, some of which will be doing loop-de-loops by the time I pass in front of their tank with their food :biggrin:

Interesting article! I remember that the study estimated that 2% of the enlisted men in any military have what was referred to as psychopathic tendancies. I don't remember if the 2% ratio applies to our population as a whole or just the military but Grossman suggested that these individuals will gravitate to the different specialty/elite units and appear to the observer to be the perfect warriors.

Bev,
I do not personally believe that our species will ever face extinction the same way that others have - but I definitely think the greatest threats we face will be of our own making.

I have really enjoyed everyones comments - unfortunately I have to go to work soon (boo). My coworkers are probably in for an earful :smile: .
Take care,

- Chad

Because our unique intelligence also gives us our unique attribute of greed. This is the answer for many questions on why humans are destroying the planet and ultimately themselves. We have known for a long time that industrialization has damaged our planet. Yet in order to control the destruction, the economies of the countries that do the most harm would probably take a hit. Its not that we aren't smart enough to know that we are doing something wrong. It is just very expensive to do the right thing. I'd love to be using solar and wind power to generate my electricity and be driving a fuel cell car (though it would be better for the planet to ride a bike and wash all of my clothes by hand). :smile: That's just 1 example. Another example. How many of us want big houses with lots of land. If everyone of us bought large properties, how much land is left for the animals??

Bahhh you guys type to damn much, don't you have jobs? :mrgreen:

Steve

Personally, I think greed is a spinoff behavior of territoriality.