Warfare Shaped Human Evolution?
A recent science article reports some of the conclusions of a conference on the nature of warfare. See this link: http://www.newscientist.com/article/...html?full=true
In particular, the article addresses how warfare has affected human natural selection. We have the (possibly hardwired) advantage of being more cooperative when engaged in intergroup conflict (which can translate to sports and business), but there’s a suggestion that it’s only scalable to a point and that we may have been built for small wars (or at least small battles), not the giant, impersonal conflicts that we seem to be trained to execute in modern militaries. And, if this kind of stuff is hardwired biologically, do we have any chance of eliminating armed conflict by simply advancing “civilization”?
MAJ Roger Stanley
Good catch. The article seemingly confirms
thoughts based on my observations over many years; there is a genetic imprint. I think the good (or bad, viewpoint dependent) news is that I see an ever if only very slightly increasing number of people over the years who object strenuously to combat or war.Originally Posted by RStanley
I think that means that there will be war in our lifetime and those of our children and even great grandchildren -- but their great grandchildren may escape it...
Last edited by Ken White; 12-10-2008 at 06:06 PM. Reason: Typo
New theory?
From his 1995 dissertation "The Origin of War", Dr. J.M.G. Van Der Dennen has proposed this, and continues to do write on the issue from Groeningen University.
http://dissertations.ub.rug.nl/facul...an.der.dennen/
He's been pilloried by Anthros about it for years, but now, watch it become the "next new thing" in mainline Anthropology....
Excellent reading & very insightful opinions.
Separately, often overlooked by philosophers is the implication by Christ that ending warfare as we understand it would be a mission impossible. He says that wars & rumors of wars will continue until the end of the age.
I find this a commentary on human nature & our personal imperections & weaknesses which will lead us ever back to the battlefields of the earth.
Soldiers, like priests fall into that genetic grouping of "Many are called but few are chosen."
Many refers to the days of the Draft Years and the Few who are Chosen are in many way those who geneticly lean towards the warrior traits.
We have all met and served with unique individuals who are better equiped mentally and physically to the rigors of combat.
In a population of 300,00,000 million citizens, a small percentage of that huge demographic are predisposed to be military men and women.
It is not a given, but it is a likely path of a percentage of our citizens to be drawn to a military life. Not everyone who joins the military is solidly in the military mode, but by degrees the martial activities that are more in tune with the warrior ethos draws people to the signifigant arms groups of Infantry, Armor and Artillery.
Then there are those who are pulled into volunteering for the Marines, Marine Recon, Army Infantry, Rangers, Airborne Infantry, Mech Infantry and the rarified levels of Special Forces, Force Recon, Seals, and the Delta Squadrons. Taking that extra step or two and volunteering again and again to go into the next level.
Fighter Jocks, Gunship Drivers and in my generation "Wild Weasles" and the A-6 Mud Movers all had a drop more of
Berserker Blood than most of us.
I beleive that war is still shaping our evolution. There are some genetics involved. My father was a WWI Marine officer and he swore that the Celts he learned about trench warfare from were "happy" to go forward with bayonets, compared to the average English infantryman he encountered in France.
He said the Scot, Irish and Welsh Regiments were a little slack on appearance but their weapons and especially those that were edged with cold steel were always clean and ready to go to work.
He also admired some of the French African units he fought along side of. I don't remember the Country or region, but he said they were all tall and lean and the Germans were terrified of them.
He told me that US Marine and Army officers were sent to train and observe the British Regiments in action so they could come back and train their companies and platoons for the static warfare that was WWI.
War is one of our race's major involvements. Is it any wonder that it has shaped our evolution?
Last edited by RJ; 12-13-2008 at 02:31 AM.
I have no surprises with that. Seems to me that most successful cultures are the ones that use violence, when and if they have to. I take Colin Grays point that violence must be instrumental and not recreational, but I know a few folk who seem to find war and conflict, extremely rewarding, if not "fun."
Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"
- The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
- If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition
Read some Hawai'ian pre-1778 (or even pre-XXth Cent.) history. The peoples of Central Asia, the Balkans, and the Middle East fought in a constant, desperate competition for resources in order to survive. In Hawai'i, the landscape throws food at you so, as near as I can figure, fighting was an intersection of lethal organized sport and artistic expression.
I'm re-reading the classic John Dalmas' "The Regiment".
If nothing else, it proposes that for warriors, war is a form of play.
I find it interesting how women can pick up "warrior" from a great distance.
Yes. In college I had some surreal experiences with peace activist women. They'd denigrate me for being in the military, then make it clear that I was welcome to get to "know" them. I decided against it as they struck me as having a screw loose.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks