So, in your estimation, hutning is the only way to be "in" nature..? Laffo.
No, it's just clear to me you've never spent a very long time around animals, of any sort.
You're confusing the act of killing something and deriving pleasure from it with killing something and simply not feeling any guilt, remorse.
No, I'm not. The only reason something will do something is if it is caused by something. Right? So what would cause an animal, in terms of our understanding of consciousness, to ever do something?
Nay, I'm saying that pleasure-kills are aberrant. Big difference.
Explain the difference.
Or because they *need* to do it, or feel driven to do it in order to survive which is the typical case. Animals enjoy surviving. That doesn't mean they enjoy the act of killing when it's not needed -- which is why most do not do that.
Most animals don't kill simply because most other animals don't let themselves get killed. People who spend their whole life watching animals, like photographers for National Geographic, naturalists, or Discovery Channel cameramen will tell you that most of the time, big graphic, gory kills don't happen. Most of the time animals fail at killing other animals. This isn't the case for birds eating bugs and stuff, but bugs can almost be viewed as plankton, ecologically speaking.
Anyway, how would natural selection engineer this survival mechanism to do things that *need* to be done? For higher vertebrates with better abilities to discriminate, different actions need certain weights at certain times. If it is mating season, a successful animals should find more pleasure (ie, be more likely to) in finding a mate than satiating immediate needs, like being a little thirsty or hungry. When you get to things like people, we enjoy having sex, but we wear condoms, take pills, have copper tubes inserted in our cervixes, etc. I think big cats, dogs, and other animals work sort of like that. They are internally rewarded for killing, since most of the time any chance for a kill that arises, they need to take it. A cheetah or a lion can't really skip out on a gazelle and eat a tofu-burger later. They are dedicated carnivores, so need a high weight to increase the likelihood that they will give up other activities and chase and eat or hide and eat. In other words, they must find killing pleasurable.
They don't find it fun to bite and kill humans, or they would be doing it way more.
What is the relevance? Sharks probably love the feeling of sinking their teeth into a seal or a dolphin or perhaps a tasty fish.
I also see you ignored the part about the cuttlefish. Why?
Maybe they're more primtiive... but it's mammals we're talking about, then predatorialness and killing among mammals occurs on a much less frequent basis than it does with other chordates.
I'm not really sure what you're saying here. Mammals, with primates at the top, are probably the biggest bunch of murdering psychopaths on the planet.
What? It's a question. Exactly what about it, in your estimation, makes it enjoyable? Surely that's not a difficult question for you to answer.
Enjoyment in killing encourages animals to kill more. For predators that subsist largely off of only the prey they catch, they need a lot of encouragement (ie pleasure) to ignore having to run hard in the hot sun and deal with quills and hoofs and bites. Otherwise they won't get a meal
Wars are frequent in foreign shitholes like Africa. On a more general basis, wars are not something that people like. The vast, vast, VAST majority of humans would prefer not to participate in ANY war. Wars aren't started by general populaces, however. They're started by bloodthirsty little piglets who go insane and then forcibly draft people into their service. Trust me... they'd rather not be there.
Also, the USA is hardly "full" of murder, when it takes place on a 1 out of a 100,000 person basis (look it up). We simply hear about it often because of the huge volume of people living here. It's very out of the norm, however.
We're talking about humans as animals, and, as animals, we are extremely prone to violence. Murder rates have also gone down in the West simply because you can fill someone with bullets and modern medicine will put them back together. Here's an article on adjusted murder rates:
http://www.dailycardinal.com/article/14515
Also note all the extremely bad things that happen to murderers. It is surprising that murders happen at all, given how shitty it is to be a felon in the US. If you remove the disincentives from people, they go about murdering each other.
Given the numbers in the article, within 60 years, between 1 and 1.5% of a population would be murdered, given 1960s medical technology. That is a huge proportion, given that most animals, even social ones, don't kill each other, ever. Except primates, who we are very closely related to. Note that this is with 1960s medical technology- antibiotics, surgery, knowledge of human anatomy, highly specialized doctors. If it weren't for medicine, the murder rate would likely be many times higher. "Modern" stone age tribes that have been studied by anthropologists have murder rates hundreds of times higher than that of modern Americans!
As for the case of war- how do you draft someone who doesn't want to do something, if most people don't want to do it? People let themselves be controlled. Look at all the people on this board who are like "please, take my freedom, I can't handle it." People support war- otherwise it wouldn't happen. What do you think patriotism is about? Or liking sports? Or being on a team? Have you ever seen how psychotic suburbanites get over their kids' soccer games? Humans are hardwired to form groups and violently opposed others. Look at the thousand pages of heated debate between nerds in the Star Wars vs. Star Trek thread. In every facet of life, people are forming groups to oppose other groups, and, when there aren't enough disincentives, they'll kill each other over it.
