Is a certain amount of cruelty just an inherent trait of man?

[Katy Alexander]

.
Yes it is, if you compare humans to other animals I am afraid that it is usually the human who is far more violent without good reason. While it is true that animals will kill for food, and will fight when feeling threatened,it is only humans who will kill, and torture for sport.

Fortunately most people are not capable of extreme cruelty, but our larger brains have given us a sense of entitlement, and superiority that can make us destructive to each other as well as other living things.It is the cruelety that we do not have to directly witness that is easy for us to justify.

I think it it may be opposite of what many people believe.If we truly want to avoid our crueler more destructive side we may need to be more in touch with our natural instincts not deny them. We need to accept that we are no better than the other animals that we share our space with.

There is no question about it. People are the most destructive, and at time deliberately cruel. We have no competition on that one.

[charlestudor2005]

When I first read this title, Is a certain amount of cruelty just an inherent trait of man? I thought you meant "cruelty as an inherent trait of men" as opposed to women.

Then I read some of the posts in the thread, and it appears most others took you question to mean "human beings" regardless of gender.

So, was your original question about cruelty in men (as opposed to women) or in human beings (as opposed to other forms of life)?

[Laurentius]

Everybody knows that some men have more resources than others. At any given moment in time, the resources available are finite. Men compete for those resources because directly or indirectly, control of resources ultimately increases likelihood of more and better offspring.

Let's face it. My choices of women if I have $100M in the bank are a bit different than my choices if I have $1 in the bank. Some may argue it should be different -- but it isn't. And there are few motivations stronger than those pertaining to sex. And if I have $100M in the bank; my offspring will likely have a far better set of choices in life than if I had $1. Wellbeing of offspring is a huge motivator for people.

Competition for resources can range from a mildly manipulative ad (such as portraying a pretty woman in a convertible to sell cars) to full-scale war.

We are a species that not only amasses resources; but amasses them far in excess of our actual needs. And we amass it in competition against other members of our own species.

How much of seemingly gratuitous violence is disguised in this way? When I lay someone off; I am depriving them of the means of food and shelter so I can pocket the difference. Cruelty can be economic as well.

So I am wondering: just how much of our capacity for cruelty is tied to resource competition?

Of course, classical economic theories are incorrect in a number of ways. The fact I beat my competitors and accumulated more resources doesn't really give an indication of my objective merit. After all, I might have beat my competitors through clever legal trickery, unprosecutable theft, intimidation, blackmail, etc. But as long as I win the resource competition -- I get access to a better future for offspring without regard to how or why it was won.

This circumstance could predispose a capacity for cruelty.

Thoughts?

[ElisabethWhispers]

Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

When I first read this title, Is a certain amount of cruelty just an inherent trait of man? I thought you meant "cruelty as an inherent trait of men" as opposed to women.

Then I read some of the posts in the thread, and it appears most others took you question to mean "human beings" regardless of gender.

So, was your original question about cruelty in men (as opposed to women) or in human beings (as opposed to other forms of life)?

Yes. Human beings is what I meant. I'm rarely politically correct. What I meant by "man" was "all mankind". I would like to contribute a little more to this discussion at a later time, though. I appreciate the responses thus far!

Elisabeth

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Laurentius

Criminals who succumb to our beastly nature also wake up in the morning and say: "I'm a good and decent person." How? By rationalizing their behavior as just, justified, and even at times to be correcting an injustice. They are the heroes and their victims are the bad guys.

It is true, as you say, that we have the ability to override this. Our explicitly held beliefs and values (combined with other forces such as social pressure or threat of punishment) can serve to override a natural inclination to beat the crap out of one's lousy boss.

We all think we are just....that was my point. Hilter thought the means justified the end. Had he won the war...history would have been much kinder towards him.

Every single one of us does cruel things...some just seem to think they do not. That is the message here. We are all cruel to someone...and thank God we are so.

Everyone fights for what they believe in....and that can get really ugly at a certain point. Charlie Darwin had it correct about that fittest thingy.

[Katy Alexander]

Originally Posted by WTF

Charlie Darwin had it correct about that fittest thingy.

Survival of the fittest.That has to be one of my favorite sayings, and another reason why I prefer hanging out with animals.In their world it is the strong who survive, and the week just naturally die off. In our world the week are well taken care of , and the strong are the ones who pay for it all.

[Guest042611]

Originally Posted by Becky

.
Yes it is, if you compare humans to other animals I am afraid that it is usually the human who is far more violent without good reason. While it is true that animals will kill for food, and will fight when feeling threatened,it is only humans who will kill, and torture for sport.

I don't know if that's totally true. Sometimes my cats kill little animals (mice, garter snakes, baby birds) and don't eat them. It seems like they're just playing hunter.

Though I do agree with other things you said, regarding humans' entitlement, superiority, etc. Love this Ghandi quote: "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated."

[Katy Alexander]

Originally Posted by Natalie

I don't know if that's totally true. Sometimes my cats kill little animals (mice, garter snakes, baby birds) and don't eat them. It seems like they're just playing hunter.

Though I do agree with other things you said, regarding humans' entitlement, superiority, etc. Love this Ghandi quote: "The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated."

Natalie,you must have read my mind because right after I wrote that it had me thinking about some of the cats that I grew up with. They can be so cruel to the things they catch. Those darn cats have managed to blow my whole theory to bits lol.

I love that Ghandi quote.There is a lot of truth in what he says

This is an interesting thread. I love questions like this.

[Rudyard K]

Originally Posted by Becky

Natalie,you must have read my mind because right after I wrote that it had me thinking about some of the cats that I grew up with. They can be so cruel to the things they catch. Those darn cats have managed to blow my whole theory to bits lol.

Kind of makes one think about the "Men are dogs and women are cats" sayings, huh?

[Spaulding Smails]

Cruelty is innate in man. We are evolved from chimps. Have you ever seen tribes of chimps fight over territory on Animal Planet or Discovery? The Earth is 5 Bln years old. Man is 150,000 years old. We are very young in our evolution. Mankind will hopefully evolve for the better, but not during our lifetimes. Sorry there isn't a more encouraging answer for you, Elisabeth!

[Katy Alexander]

Originally Posted by Rudyard K

Kind of makes one think about the "Men are dogs and women are cats" sayings, huh?

.

I guess that is why I have always preferred dogs over cats

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Becky

.

I guess that is why I have always preferred dogs over cats

Now if you were a cat you would think that a cruel thing to say!

In another time and place...my motto was cruelty is in the eye of the beholder. Or one mans terrorist is anothers , freedom fighter.

Not that I wanna go there or that the other side ever understood that POV.

[Wwanderer]

Originally Posted by Becky

Natalie,you must have read my mind because right after I wrote that it had me thinking about some of the cats that I grew up with. They can be so cruel to the things they catch. Those darn cats have managed to blow my whole theory to bits lol.

I love that Ghandi quote.There is a lot of truth in what he says

This is an interesting thread. I love questions like this.

A couple of decades back somewhere I recall reading a (serious
scientific) paper claiming to show that cats have independent
instincts/appetites for stalking, chasing, pouncing, fighting, killing
and eating prey...roughly; I might have some details wrong. In
other words, their behavior is not due simply to the single motivation
of hunger. And, indeed, it is common to see overly well-fed house
cats going after small creatures with an energy and "enthusiasm"
that cannot be due to pure hunger.

Even more relevant perhaps, if you read field studies of the behavior
of "higher" (but what do they smoke?) primates, you will find plenty
of accounts of their shockingly human-like and clearly deliberate
cruelty to one another.

Perhaps the way in which our species is most unique is in the incredible
arrogance of thinking that we are unique among the species! ;-)

-Ww

[Katy Alexander]

Originally Posted by WTF

In another time and place...my motto was cruelty is in the eye of the beholder. Or one mans terrorist is anothers , freedom fighter.

There is a lot of truth to that. It is so easy to forget that most things truly are in the eye of the beholder including cruelty.

Originally Posted by Wwanderer

A couple of decades back somewhere I recall reading a (serious
scientific) paper claiming to show that cats have independent
instincts/appetites for stalking, chasing, pouncing, fighting, killing
and eating prey...roughly; I might have some details wrong. In
other words, their behavior is not due simply to the single motivation
of hunger. And, indeed, it is common to see overly well-fed house
cats going after small creatures with an energy and "enthusiasm"
that cannot be due to pure hunger.

Even more relevant perhaps, if you read field studies of the behavior
of "higher" (but what do they smoke?) primates, you will find plenty
of accounts of their shockingly human-like and clearly deliberate
cruelty to one another.

Perhaps the way in which our species is most unique is in the incredible
arrogance of thinking that we are unique among the species! ;-)

-Ww

I am afraid I was a little fast in assuming that there is no deliberate cruelty in nature .Dolphins have been known to form packs to rape , and kill smaller dolphins.They have also been seen doing similar things to other young mammals without reason. I remember hearing similar stories about some of the primates .I was being a little idealistic when I placed them above us. I think that you are right one species is no better, or worse than the other .Although I still prefer the company of animals.

I wish we could just all be like the Manatees.They never harm anything.

( now please if anyone has anything negative to say about my ATF mammal ,such as a herd of wild Manatees was seen molesting a star fish. I beg of you to not post it. Please let me have my delusions )

[Ansley]

Originally Posted by Becky

( my ATF mammal ,such as a heard of wild Manatees

I'm telling Edward!