“As human populations grew thicker in the Valley of Mexico, the Aztec ruling class was still able to enjoy such delicacies as dogs, turkeys, ducks, deer, rabbits, and fish. But animal flesh was virtually eliminated from the diets of the commoners, who were occasionally reduced to eating clumps of spirulina algae skimmed from the surface of Lake Texcoco. The situation was partially relieved by cannibalizing the victims of human sacrifice. As many as fifteen thousand persons a year were being consumed in the Valley of Mexico when Cortez entered. The conquistadors found a hundred thousand skulls stacked in neat rows in the plaza at Xocotlan and another 136 thousand at Tenochtitlán. The priesthood said that human sacrifice was approved by the high gods, and they sanctified it with elaborate rituals performed amid statuary of the gods placed on imposing white temples erected for this purpose. But these trappings should not distract us from the fact that immediately after their hearts had been cut out, the victims were systematically butchered like animals and their parts distributed and eaten. Those favored in the feasts included the nobility, their retainers,
and the soldiery, in other words the groups with the greatest political power.”
Wilson, Edward O.. On Human Nature (S.94). Harvard University Press. Kindle-Version.
“The “drive-discharge” model created by Freud and Lorenz has been replaced by a more subtle explanation based on the interaction of genetic potential and learning. The most persuasive single piece of evidence for the latter, “culture-pattern” model has been provided by Richard G. Sipes, an anthropologist. Sipes noted that if aggression is a quantity in the brain that builds up and is released, as suggested by the drive-discharge model, then it can take the form of either war or the most obvious substitutes of war, including combative sports, malevolent witchcraft, tatooing and other ritualized forms of body mutilation, and the harsh treatment of deviates. As a consequence, warlike activities should result in a reduction of its lesser substitutes. If, in contrast, violent aggression is the realization of a potential that is enhanced by learning, an increase in the practice of war should be accompanied by an increase in the substitutes. By comparing the qualities of ten notably warlike societies with those of ten pacific societies, Sipes found that the culture-pattern model is upheld over the rival drive-discharge hypothesis: the practice of war is accompanied by a greater development of combatant sports and other lesser forms of violent aggression. The clear perception of human aggressive behavior as a structured, predictable pattern of interaction between genes and environment is consistent with evolutionary theory.”
“... On the one hand it is true that aggressive behavior, especially in its more dangerous forms of military action and criminal assault, is learned. But the learning is prepared, in the sense explained in Chapter 3; we are strongly predisposed to slide into deep, irrational hostility under certain definable conditions. With dangerous ease hostility feeds on itself and ignites runaway reactions that can swiftly progress to alienation and violence. Aggression does not resemble a fluid that continuously builds pressure against the walls of its containers, nor is it like a set of active ingredients poured into an empty vessel. It is more accurately compared to a preexisting mix of chemicals ready to be transformed by specific catalysts that are added, heated, and stirred at some later time. The products of this neural chemistry are aggressive responses that are distinctively human. Suppose that we could enumerate all of the possible kinds of actions in all species. In this imaginary example, there might be exactly twenty-three such responses, which could be labeled A through W. Human beings do not and cannot manifest every behavior; perhaps all of the societies in the world taken together employ A through P. Furthermore, they do not develop each of the options with equal facility; there is a strong tendency under all existing conditions of child rearing for behaviors A through G to appear, and consequently H through P are encountered in very few cultures. It is the pattern of such probabilities that is inherited. We say that for each environment there is a corresponding probability distribution of responses. …”
Wilson, Edward O.. On Human Nature (S.105-106). Harvard University Press. Kindle-Version.
Posts
