.
Contributions will be
added to the top of this collection as I receive them .
From Phil Bartle Date: Sun, 16 Jan Ironically, one species that does
not have any mechanism to stop an individual of the same species from fighting,
it is the dove, our symbol of peace. If two doves start fighting, and one
weakens, it does not have a way (like a wolf or dog showing submission
by presenting its neck) of calling off the enemy, calling "uncle." The
winning dove will continue pecking the loser long after it is dead. Date: Sun, 16 Jan From: allison m I wish I could remember the name
of the Behavioral Biologist that I recently read a book by, but I cannot
and don't have the book in front of me. The book was entitled "On
Agression", and I'd advise anyone thinking about the "nuke" problem to
read it. The main point that is salient here is that we are not carnivors
with built in instincts to prevent us from killing each other. In
a natural setting one chimp cannot really kill another chimp, before that
one can get away or apease its attacker. However, put a tool (like
a rock) into the hand of the chimp and suddenly it can. The first
human that killed his/her friend with the rock that s/he'd been breaking
open bones with was probably startled. "That wasn't supposed to happen."
Our neat thing called technology lets us bypass a lot of limitation that
are placed on us by nature, but some of them maybe shouldn't be bypassed.
All creatures that have to be agressive have ways to prevent them being
agressive towards members of their own species, most of these have to do
with being close to the other member so you can "recognize" that it's another
chimp. Take the rock away, give the chimp a gun; now it doesn't even
get the "don't kill" smell from the other chimp. Now, a sniper rifle
- more space - less anti-kill instinct. Now, give a pilot a button
to push. Suddenly we have the answer to why a perfectly normal person
could press a button and unleash death upon a whole people and then go
home and cuddle with his/her child - total and compleat disconnect.
And our 'training facilities' help with this disconnect. The recent
massy lecturer said that "we are working with 21st century software on
pre-history hardware." I'd say it's time for an upgrade before we
destroy our whole race and our whole planet. TX. For reading, Allison Date: Thu, 13 Jan From: "Jamie G" The issue you raise brings a very
important question to hand. When does technology become a counter productive
step in our (human beings) evolution? The "further technologically
advanced" we as a civilization become, the higher the consequences we face
become as well. What we know from studying past species that have inhabited
this earth, is that adaptation is the key to survival. Albert Einstein
cracked the secret of the Atom for advancement of the technological field
to benefit Human existence. That technology was used to create nuclear
weapons for protection of our species. It is that exact same technology
that is now looming over the world with the threat of nuclear war that
has the capability to destroy everything as we know it. Thank you, Jamie G Date: January 13 From: Daniel W as human beings, we have significantly
advanced in technology over the last hundred years. it could be argued
that it is our increase in pollution and damage to the environment, that
will inevitably destroy us or that we could avoid further destruction to
the ecosystem by using our advanced technology. we already see this trend
being implemented with the use of electric cars and recycling. on the other
hand the world is running out of room to dispose of toxic waste which we
currently still need to somehow get rid of because it is produced as a
result of everyday necessities, which we use on a routine basis. the laws
that are put in place by authorities, for companies to follow to
get rid of waste often times are not. it is less expensive for companies
to dump toxic chemicals in the ocean, than it is to legally deal with their
problem. companies sometimes take this risk because they are in it for
the profit, and there is usually no serious form of retribution to the
company. the public has no clemency for the company if they find out what
the company has done, but that usually never happens. we are very technologically
advaced compared to one hundred years ago, but it is this technology that
will ultimately destroy us.
