Synergy Goes to War: A Bioeconomic Theory of Collective Violence

作者: Peter A. Corning

DOI: 10.1007/S10818-007-9017-2

关键词:

摘要: Synergy – here defined as otherwise unattainable combined effects that are produced by two or more elements, parts individuals has played a key causal role in the evolution of complexity, from very origins life to humankind and complex societies. This theory known ‘Synergism Hypothesis’ also applies social behavior, including use collective violence for various purposes: predation, defense against predators, acquisition needed resources these other groups species. Among things, there have been (1) synergies scale, (2) cost risk sharing, (3) division labor (or, better said, ‘combination labor’), (4) functional complementarities, (5) information sharing ‘intelligence’, (6) tool technology ‘symbioses’. Many examples can be seen natural world predatory bacteria like Myxococcus xanthus insects army ants colonial raiders Messor pergandei, mobbing birds common raven, cooperative pack-hunting mammals wolves, wild dogs, hyenas lions, coalitions mate-seeking mate-guarding male dolphins, well-armed troops savanna baboons, and, closest humans, group-hunting, group-raiding even ‘warring’ communities chimpanzees. Equally significant, is reason believe forms were vital importance our own ancestors’ transition, over several million years, an arboreal, frugivorous, mostly quadrupedal ape world-traveling, omnivorous, large-brained, tool-dependent, loquacious biped. The thesis warfare not recent ‘historical’ invention will briefly reviewed this paper. does mean humans are, after all, ‘killer apes’ with reflexive blood-lust aggressive ‘drive’. biological, psychological cultural underpinnings far subtle complex. Most important, incidence nature human societies alike greatly influenced kinds, which shape ‘bioeconomic’ benefits, costs risks. necessary (but sufficient) agency. Though notable exceptions (and some significant qualifiers), is, large, evolved, synergy-driven instrumentality humankind, mindless instinct reproductive strategy run amok.

参考文章(475)
Peter A. Corning, Biological Adaptation in Human Societies: a ‘Basic Needs’ Approach Journal of Bioeconomics. ,vol. 2, pp. 41- 86 ,(2000) , 10.1023/A:1010027222840
S Kessler, R Kakihana, P A Corning, Three kinds of aggressive behavior in laboratory mice. Abstr. pp. 51- ,(1977)
L. David Mech, Leadership in wolf, Canis lupus, packs Canadian Field-Naturalist. ,vol. 114, pp. 259- 263 ,(2000)
Sarah Blaffer Hrdy, Mothers and others. Natural History. ,vol. 110, pp. 50- 63 ,(2001)
Bernard Chapais, Primate Nepotism: What is the Explanatory Value of Kin Selection? International Journal of Primatology. ,vol. 22, pp. 203- 229 ,(2001) , 10.1023/A:1005619430744
Charles Kimberlin Brain, The Hunters or the Hunted ,(1981)
R. D. Alexander, How did humans evolve? Reflections on the uniquely unique species. University of Michigan Museum of Zoology. ,(1990)
Janet T. Landa, Bioeconomics of schooling fishes: selfish fish, quasi-free riders, and other fishy tales Environmental Biology of Fishes. ,vol. 53, pp. 353- 364 ,(1998) , 10.1023/A:1007414603324
Peter J. Richerson, Robert Boyd, Why Culture is Common, but Cultural Evolution is Rare Joint Discussion Meeting of the Royal Society and the British Academy. ,vol. 88, pp. 77- 93 ,(1996)