You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: PRACTICAL THINKING. —「Some physiological psychology behind oddly aggressive behavior . . .」
Rreally interesting article @tibra, well constructed and easy to follow. I think that the choice of monkey could however have a predetermined result in the first study, I would wonder had the study focused on a primarily passive monkey group like say, bonobos would have they seen such a stark change.
Keep up the great work.
Ty
Good point about the species of monkey chosen. That would be good experiment to perform again. (There's some difficulty in getting funding for animal experiments like these ones involving surgery. Much more so today. But there were some follow ups in the 50's and 60's. I might write about those and the resulting papers.)
The other major monograph is Konrad LORENZ, *Zur naturgeschichte der aggression, Wien: Borotha Schoeler. Lorenz was a friend of Pribram.
He argued, among other things, that species which evolved from species whose individuals are both more physically tough, less easily injured in the absolute sense, more robust, and also more dangerous when attacking, such as large predators, are far less aggressive. (Aggression is here famously defined as initiation of violence by members of the same species against each other, not mere predation.) The fundamental issue of aggression, then, in his view, in species such as humans and monkeys, is that these mammals evolved from generally peaceful, weak, and harmless foraging ancestors. They can easily injure each other yet have little evolved psychology to limit aggression, and dominance hierarchy position.
Well I did have a detailed reply but then my esteem app had a brain fart. So I will go with this.
😀