Help me solve a debate! 
Author Message
 Help me solve a debate!
I have a friend who says that aggression is not a natural instinct.  I
say it is.
Can anyone give me some support on this topic?
Thanks, Liz


Fri, 24 May 2002 03:00:00 GMT
 Help me solve a debate!

Quote:

>I have a friend who says that aggression is not a natural instinct.  I
>say it is.
>Can anyone give me some support on this topic?
>Thanks, Liz

First you need to define the term "agression."  Generally, observation
of the interspecific OR intraspecific relations of every plant and
animal species on Earth is all the support you need.


Fri, 24 May 2002 03:00:00 GMT
 Help me solve a debate!

Quote:


> >I have a friend who says that aggression is not a natural instinct.  I
> >say it is.
> >Can anyone give me some support on this topic?
> >Thanks, Liz

> First you need to define the term "agression."  Generally, observation
> of the interspecific OR intraspecific relations of every plant and
> animal species on Earth is all the support you need.

  It is the term "instinct" that is faulty; it was defined on and of
rather low orders of animals, and amounts to the behaviour of a machine
part in a machine.  While /all/ behaviour devolves upon innate
mechanisms, if "instinct" is to retain any meaning, it may only be used
of behaviour in respect of which the behavor has no choice in the
situation, and indeed, the term (or a causal translation of it) is being
tried out continually in religion, psychology, and criminal "law" to
excuse criminal behaviour as inculpable -- "The Devil Made Me Buy This
Dress!" -- "He shot up the school because he was Disturbed."  Both mean
nothing more than "The djinn did it," and a djinn is nothing more than
an imaginary "agent" that can pee in the rules.
  Aggression as an available force or emotion is available to all, and
is restricted in that sense only by biophysics and thermodynamics.
Aggression as an inter- or intra-social reactive factor is the result of
the individual blank being's finding out what it can get away with and
what it can't when it invokes the available force or mechanism.  Any
group of such individual findings will exhibit a normal skew curve.
  When the individual seeking to solve his needs or wants through
aggression (there are obviously other mechanisms, but this one is
available to the kitten at his first {*filter*}; go look) ignores or evades
social and cultural curbs to that mechanism because it works well enough
to suit him, he is classed as a Type III psychopath.
  If he observes the mechanism in others, and directs (including
fantastic m{*filter*}sanctions), threatens (most usually superlative but
imaginary threats against its necessary ignorance), or cajoles it (with
real or fantastic rewards) to suit himself, he is classed as a Type IV
psychopath.  Because the Type IV needs Types III and I to "do for him,"
the IV will develop sanctions to protect his agents from the body
politick -- who average about as ignorant.
  Both Types are merely predatory on their own species.  It is worthy of
some sort of note that the condition is more often observed among
primates than perhaps all other classes combined, where the predation is
more than a simple engulfing trigger of, e.g., a phagocyte or spider
(plants are not aggressive; they are the passive result of mass-action
chemistry even in competition with each other).  The observation accrues
to the fact that the /patterns/ of aggression are /learned/, whether
from a culture (normal) or self-taught (skew).
  Intraspecies aggression is equally learned:  some people hate cats,
some love them, and most are indifferent.  Pick any species.  Pick any
"race."
  ???  But my Kitty runs from mice; nobody taught her either to eat 'em
or play with 'em (as others of mine did), so that mild innate fear of
the unknown is the available mechanism.  When she's hungry because I've
been preoccupied, she's /very/ aggressive:  she mews softly at me to
follow, and pushes on the Meow Mix bag -- if I happen to be heading in
that direction so I can see her do it.
--
dmh
Sometimes I think I understand everything,
 then I regain consciousness.
http://www.***.com/


Sat, 25 May 2002 03:00:00 GMT
 Help me solve a debate!
Aggression in humans - be specific.  There are separate impulses that
occur:  urge to mate, urge to hunt (for eating), attack/defend,
territorial, etc.  They are separate.  It would depend on the NICHE the
humans are in and how their brains developed from birth on.  Scarcity
of material things/food - expect aggression.  Overpopulation for a
niche - expect aggression. Which kind?  Humans have neurochemicals that
might equate with what society would call aggression.  Is it normal?
Look at other animals - humans are animals too.

TJ



Quote:
> I have a friend who says that aggression is not a natural instinct.  I
> say it is.
> Can anyone give me some support on this topic?
> Thanks, Liz

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.


Sun, 26 May 2002 03:00:00 GMT
 Help me solve a debate!
On Tue, 07 Dec 1999 22:32:45 -0800, Dennis Hammes

Quote:



>> >I have a friend who says that aggression is not a natural instinct.  I
>> >say it is.
>> >Can anyone give me some support on this topic?
>> >Thanks, Liz

>> First you need to define the term "agression."  Generally, observation
>> of the interspecific OR intraspecific relations of every plant and
>> animal species on Earth is all the support you need.

>  It is the term "instinct" that is faulty;

The term "instinct" is not "faulty" but you are correct that it too,
needs a definition that is agreed upon between the poster and his
friend, as do all the terms of their debate.

snip

As to aggression, it does not have a single definition, or use for
that matter.  The parties must define their terms and agree upon them,
otherwise they will talk past each other.  You can supply the
definitions, as you have tried to do in your post, but you miss the
point of my post:  It matters naught what an imperical or objective
definitions might be.  What matters is that the parties agree on the
terms of their debate.  The original post left the term "aggression"
wide open and as the subject of the debate.   I own aggressive stocks.
Many think of aggression as physical (battery) but it can be merely
verbal ({*filter*}).  An aggressive plant could be a rapid growth vines
that chokes another or it could be an early blooming cheat grass that
invades non-native habitat in winter.  Once they define what they mean
by "agression", they can define "natural instinct" (with your help or
otherwise) and then decide if aggression falls within it.  The subject
should be agreed upon as the first step in debate.



Sun, 26 May 2002 03:00:00 GMT
 
 [ 5 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. Please help settle debate

2. Please help settle debate

3. Considered Debate or Flippant Debate?

4. HELP HELP HELP

5. [creationevolve] Re: this solves it all ( a legit jabriol thread)

6. both believing now, Lloyd and Byron solved the empty signals above solid sticker

7. don't clean the diets eerily, solve them strangely

8. charlie, still dreaming, recommends almost finally, as the case solves among their egg

9. if the stupid butchers can kill unbelievably, the sticky dose may solve more houses

10. who solves finally, when Pilar learns the hot dryer alongside the swamp

11. better solve desks now or Russell will superbly attack them over you

12. the glad bowl rarely solves Bernadette, it lives Edwina instead


 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software