(no subject)

[sophiaserpentia]

An "idle thought" inspired by the conversion on my recent entries about pleasure restriction.

Human civilization is only possible because we are predators.

Comments

[weishaupt.livejournal.com]

Predatorial behaviour certainly helped us make it to where we are today, but we have no challenging prey left and have turned on each other. It's turned into something we have to out-evolve. It's an appendix.

[liminalia.livejournal.com]

Explain please? Do you mean that in the beginning, we only made tools to hunt and process prey, and would not have done so if we were herbivores?

uh huh

[novasoy.livejournal.com]

That is one way of looking at it. A very compelling school of thought or paradigm or whatever in Political Science that says, essentially, "The strong do what they will. The weak suffer what they must." (Thucydides, Pelopennesian War) In other words, there are strong people and weak people. The strong overwhelm the weak. And this is what many call human nature. Whether or not one thinks this can be changed, I guess, divides people into realist and idealist camps.

But this predator/prey thing... I think this has been the trend thoughout history, and taking it one step further to call the relationship one of predator-prey is appropriate in most cases.

The stronger elements of society feed upon the weak and derive much from them -- resources, labor, cannon fodder. The weak derive almost nothing from the relationship other than what can at best be described as security. It is security in a sense, but it is the security one gets in a prison.

Another way to look at it is that the relationship is like the one between the gangster and the "civilian" in a classic protection racket. The gangster extorts from the civilian under the guise of exchanging cash for security. In truth, if the civilian refuses, the main thing he has to worry about is the gangster himself. And if he accepts the gangster's protection, he is still under subjugation from the gangster, who may still extort and persecute the civilian, who is effectively helpless.

This oppressor/oppressed way of looking at history is a very interesting one. Howard Zinn's "People's History of the United States" is the classic example. I tend to agree with it completely.

[azaz-al.livejournal.com]

Not so...
Civilization is possible because human being are social, tool using animals. Cooperation is vital to the survival of humans. If humans did not have a strong inclination to cooperation, most of them would never put up with the crap they do.
This is the trouble with extremely individualistic philosophies - it is nearly impossible for a human to live well or long without the help of other humans. Even hermits come out to trade or buy human made goods occasionally.
But because we are predators, we have a strong inclination towards violence or agression as well. In order to assure our survival, societies spring up which provide enforced guidelines of what type of agressive behavior is allowed, towards whom, and at what times.

[sable-twilight.livejournal.com]

Human civilization (and I mean this in terms of social units larger then the basic tribe) is only possible because we have beer (and other intoxicants).

Look at anthropology. The one thing in common with every civilization they have in common is some sort of brewed, beer like intoxicant. I don't think this is coincidence. I don't think we would have settled without it. And I think the allure of beer is probably what got us to settled in the first place. We needed to settle to make it in large quantities. I think we discovered how to make it by accident – a stash of gain some place accidentally got wet and fermented – we're smart enough to figure it out from there.

That's my personal theory anyway.

[cktraveler.livejournal.com]

Ultimately the history of humanity is the history of class struggle, the battle between the haves and the have-nots.

What it is that the haves have changes over time. It used to be personal strength; then it became the ability to command those with personal strength. Nowadays it seems to be the ability to move businesses from one place to another, and the ability to move hatred from one place to another through demagoguery ... proving that, no matter how much the human race changes, the nastiest weapon in our arsenal is still the jawbone of an ass.

[threeandnine.livejournal.com]

On the other hand, we may be able to exist as predators, but we succeed as conquerors. And I mean that in the most optimistic sense of the word.