Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
capacity for evil. For both Bowles and I, certain aspects of our capacity to harm others emerges as an
incidental byproduct of other capacities, and once this dynamic emerges, the combination of these
capacities can evolve and change. What Bowles’ analysis misses, however, is the fact that parochial
altruism could well be true, and so too could our shared capacity for killing with chimpanzees. As noted
above, rates of killing among chimpanzees and several small scale societies are comparable, and so too
are the costs and benefits to attackers and victims. This argues in favor of a shared history, and a shared
adaptation. It does not mean that all aspects of killing in humans are similar, or that the human mind froze
in a chimpanzee state with regard to its capacity to kill. It most definitely did not freeze.
Unlike the lethal attacks by chimpanzees that are restricted to cases where groups attack lone
victims, primarily from neighboring groups, we wreak havoc on a massive scale, with one on one, many
against many, and one against many, including victims within and outside our core group. Unlike
chimpanzees, even our young children have an appetite for violence that can be nurtured, as evidenced by
the brutality of child soldiers around the globe. Unlike chimpanzees, individuals will sacrifice themselves
for an entire group as evidenced most recently by suicide bombers in the Middle East. Unlike
chimpanzees, we derive great pleasure from watching others suffer, from watching violent movies, seeing
other animals fight, and imagining the decimation of an enemy. Our minds also generate ideological
reasons to motivate violence at extraordinary scales — again, think of suicide bombers taking their lives
for a God, as well as the reward of an idyllic afterlife. And when our minds break down, or when we are
afflicted with particular disorders early in life, we are capable of experiencing bizarre appetites for
violence, including the joy of eating the flesh of murdered victims, having intercourse with dead bodies,
and asking for bondage and whippings to enhance sexual pleasure. These novel and unanticipated ways
of harming others are the result of new hardware that has evolved only once in the history of this planet.
HARMING OTHERS, version 2.0: requires Homo sapiens hardware
We depart from the pattern of adulticide seen in other animals because of our promiscuous brain. The
idea is not that our brains evolved for killing in these unique ways, but rather, that our unique style of
thinking led to novel ways of harming as an incidental consequence. The hardware that is our brain
enabled new ways of harming others, building on specialized adaptations, some shared with other species
and some uniquely human. The result is a brain that can develop a peculiar appetite for harming others.
To see how version 2.0 runs on our distinctively human hardware, let’s return to some of the core
microcontrollers that I discussed a few sections back. Recall that there are hormones like testosterone
that surge when individuals win a competition, whether this involves the physical fighting of deer using
Hauser Chapter 1. Nature’s secrets 44
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012790