Comments by "earthstick" (@earthstick) on "Primatologist Explains the 1% Difference Between Humans \u0026 Apes | Richard Wrangham | EP 249" video.

I posted a comment after watching this, that I later removed because I thought it was just a crude thought. But it’s on my mind again. So here goes: Richard talks about apes taking out the bullies in their society and then observes that humans appear to be like domesticated animals. I take this as meaning we are somewhat pacified by a process of selecting out aggressive personalities. My initial thought was that we are presently experiencing a resurgence of the aggressive bully. WHO, WEF, lockdowns, digital ids, etc. So should we do as the ape does and take out these bullies? That’s a provocative question and it lead me to this: The aggressive personality might have been beneficial before humans became the dominant species. But now that the are no other species that threaten our survival, the aggressive personality is the threat. If it is a genetic trait, then it might be beneficial to remove that gene. But who would do that? Surely it requires a degree of psychopathy to do such a thing. This is a paradox because the species would be attempting to modify itself, but to do so, it must employ the very personality type it is trying to remove. The task never completes. It’s an example of humanity reaching a limit for self-actuated change and the reason why some changes can only come from an external source.
1
I posted a comment after watching this, that I later removed because I thought it was just a crude thought. But it’s on my mind again. So here goes: Richard talks about apes taking out the bullies in their society and then observes that humans appear to be like domesticated animals. I take this as meaning we are somewhat pacified by a process of selecting out aggressive personalities. My initial thought was that we are presently experiencing a resurgence of the aggressive bully. WHO, WEF, lockdowns, digital ids, etc. So should we do as the ape does and take out these bullies? That’s a provocative question and it lead me to this: The aggressive personality might have been beneficial before humans became the dominant species. But now that the are no other species that threaten our survival, the aggressive personality is the threat. If it is a genetic trait, then it might be beneficial to remove that gene. But who would do that? Surely it requires a degree of psychopathy to do such a thing. This is a paradox because the species would be attempting to modify itself, but to do so, it must employ the very personality type it is trying to remove. The task never completes. It’s an example of humanity reaching a limit for self-actuated change and the reason why some changes can only come from an external source.
1