Warfare is costly and dangerous to individuals therefore there must be an adaptive benefit to make it worthwhile. It allows one group status over another, which could gain them access to their resources, land and women. Evolutionary explanations suggest those who engage in war will have a higher chance of survival, as a group, therefore will have a higher chance of reproduction.
Chagnon found that warfare exists among may modern day tribal societies e.g. Yanomano of the amazon rain forest. The most frequent cause for conflict is the abduction of women to increase their village size. This supports the explanation that war may increase chances of survival and passing on genes in reproduction. It was also suggested that battle can give a man warrior status increasing chances of attraction a female. Therefore this supports the evolutionary view that warfare may increase access to resources and help in increasing reproductive success, as men successful in warfare will likely gain access to more females. However, criticisms of this study include the Yanomano's behaviour could be explained through other factors such as a biological basis which predisposed them to aggressive tendencies or through social learning and conditioning such aggressive behaviours may develop. Therefore this study cannot provided conclusive evidence towards an evolutionary view for group aggression.
Another explanation of why warfare has emerged could be due to humanity's changing lifestyle, changing of nomadic to one of tied to the land. Therefore individuals had more to lose as a result of conflict, they could not simply move away and avoid it. LeBlanc and Register suggested warfare was a consequence of environmental changes, such as raising population and dwindling food supplies. This further weakens the argument for evolution playing a leading role in development of aggressive group display.
Xenophobia (fear of foreigners) is another example of group display which in the past favoured natural selection. Wilson claims xenophobia has been documented in 'virtually every group of animals displaying higher forms of social organisation' suggesting that it is favourable in natural selection. Shaw and Wong argued this mechanism would have aided in avoiding attacks from strangers helping to increase survival chances. Having exaggerated negative stereotypes about strangers is adaptive as an over perception of threat is less costly than an under perception.
Foldesi found at football matches the racist conduct of extremist supporters led to increased spectator violence in general and xenophobic outbursts. This may provide support for an evolutionary basis as the supporters experiencing xenophobia may have caused them to behave aggressively through defence mechanisms as they feared the other racial groups. However, this explanation is deterministic and ignores the role of free will in behaviour. A criticism of xenophobia is it is more likely to be learnt through principles of social learning as no all humans experience xenophobia despite all humans coming from the same evolutionary basis. This intolerance of strangers may have been learnt from parents and peers at a young age therefore causing them to see other races negatively, explaining why such behaviour is shown in adults. Therefore group displays are unlikely to have a purely evolutionary basis and to assume this would be reductionist.
Research into group display has led to campaigns being launched to reduce racism in sport and xenophobic displays at football matches e.g. the UK football charity 'show racism the red card'. This highlights positive real world application.
Both Chagnon and Foldesi's research demonstrates that aggressive group displays still occur today. Through research it is likely several factors play a role. However, issue with evolutionary theories is they cannot be experimentally tested or observed, they are purely based on assumptions. Evolutionary theories do o consider the role of free will in behaviour therefore are deterministic. They suggest all behaviour is dictated by our evolutionary past and does not consider how biological and social influences interact, which may provide a better understanding of group display.
No comments:
Post a Comment