OpinionBy removing the most dangerous members of society throughout history, often violently, humans have become self-domesticated - similar to the way in which an animal might be made tame by such artificial selection.
      – Lee J Haywood, 2009-10-12 at 18:52:01   (15 comments)

On 2009-10-12 at 18:58:59, Lee J Haywood wrote...
Of course there's a spectrum of traits amongst humans, from the overly-empathetic to those without any remorse. But the one thing that humans have adapted to is surviving in large societies, and working both within and between groups (not to mention our ability to form ad hoc groups with a common purpose when it suits us). http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20427281.500-my-little-zebra-the-secrets-of-domestication.html
On 2009-10-13 at 04:11:35, DigitalBoss wrote...
Sounds like justification of the death penalty.
On 2009-10-13 at 09:14:41, Lee J Haywood wrote...
@DigitalBoss: Not really - forced sterilisation would have the same effect. But the 'death penalty' - or just plain murder - has had an effect historically, over thousands of years. Perhaps even going back to the origins of our species, when the most savage would be a threat to even a small group and eliminated by their own relations.
On 2009-10-13 at 15:06:03, DigitalBoss wrote...
I believe that no government should never have enough power to take a life, or sterilize one either. Having said that, I do believe that humans do tend to take themselves "out of the gene pool" in interesting ways. I like the one where the predator breaks into a home of an armed citizen and is immediately dispatched to his maker, never to reproduce again.
On 2009-10-13 at 15:07:22, DigitalBoss wrote...
no government should ever...sorry about the double negative.
On 2009-10-14 at 00:53:30, BorgClown wrote...
@DigitalBoss: You sounds likes me.
On 2009-10-14 at 00:55:37, BorgClown wrote...
But we also praise testosterone-packed activities like sports and violent entertainment, and that hasn't made us more sporty or violent than we are. Or could we be worse yet?
On 2009-10-14 at 03:16:10, DigitalBoss wrote...
The pro sport thing is to take your mind off of the politicians, and what they are doing to your country. Why do you think so many governments will use taxpayer monies to build those stadiums? They want you concerned about whether Brett Favre is really going to play another year, or not, not what they are doing.
On 2009-10-14 at 07:08:54, BorgClown wrote...
Bread and circus, never failed.
On 2009-10-14 at 10:16:58, Lee J Haywood wrote...
How is sport linked to selection? If you don't kill off people who aren't good at sport, it won't make any difference.
On 2009-10-15 at 06:05:35, BorgClown wrote...
@Lee J Haywood: Is that a trick question? Sports promote violent and extremely competitive behavior, so much it even makes the fans go violent (your hooligans?). I say you cannot completely domesticate people until you eliminate all violent behavior, criminal or otherwise. And you cannot.
On 2009-10-15 at 09:12:07, Lee J Haywood wrote...
@BorgClown: I see, you're saying that sports indicate that we're still aggressive today. I'd say that any sport that requires some degree of aggression will attract those with a lot of testosterone to practice them - i.e. those at that end of the spectrum of society, who self-select as being good at that sport. I'm not saying that there aren't extremes, only that on the whole people have learned how to be accepted by society and evolved greater sociability to do so. Actually, even the least empathetic members of society must learn how to fake sincerity in order to blend in - so maybe we just don't see them?
On 2009-10-15 at 14:42:41, DigitalBoss wrote...
And paying a lot of money is an incentive to being aggressive and violent.
On 2009-10-16 at 03:04:20, BorgClown wrote...
Also, recently it was shown that online gamers are less merciless when playing against friends, as opposed as against strangers. The explanation was that eve if we violently compete with other online tribes, we don't want to be too rude within our community for fear of being ostracized. Makes perfect sense.
On 2010-03-05 at 20:07:06, DigitalBoss wrote...
There is no society. To add to your opinion, by supporting the weakest people, we have become a nation of cry-babies in need of the nanny-state. Oh, there should be a law [said in a nasal nanny-like voice].