Chimpanzees in Uganda locked in vicious 'civil war', say researchers

submitted by

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cr71lkzv49po

34
167

Back to main discussion

Parent comment

Oh, I thought it was more of a breaking-news thing based on recent, ongoing observations? (if not, then that’s what I get for not reading the damn article)

I remember not so long ago, the fact being presented that only rats and humans killed for unnecessary reasons. For example, outside of the broad, known idea that species could kill as part of a territorial / protection / etc thing. But based on what Goodall observed, some chimps seemed to have no particular reason to kill some others of their species. It was more of a ‘I just don’t like you’ kind of thing, IIRC.

 reply
1

I don’t know where you saw that fact being presented, but surplus killing has long been documented in many species, including those who don’t make caches for winter.

 reply
5

Circling back to this:

I don’t know where you saw that fact being presented

It’s not something I read yesterday, but something I’ve encountered upon most life scenarios, upon all my readings and personal experience over the years. So again– it’s absolutely true in general, far as I know.

Indeed, right in the article you linked, reasons and causes were specifically mentioned, so it wasn’t really a case of pointing killing, far as I know.

That said, I do suspect that a predator’s instincts to kill can indeed go on ‘automatic’ at times. Easy enough to see in domestic cats upon zillions of examples, but I think it can also be argued that keeping one’s predatory skills sharp is generally super-important for predators. A little but like how given the opportunity, we naked apes love to spend loads of time on flying, killing, driving simulations, etc.

So, far as I know? What I said originally still commonly holds, with some caveats.

 reply
1

Tbh, I used that phrasing specifically because you were snippy about someone else making a claim based on their own experience and I was trying to prod you about the evidence you’re using.

When people kill each other “for no reason,” there’s often still a reason (though not an excuse)- territory in the case of gang or murder of romantic partners, protection or survivor’s benefits for your own family for soldiers killing in war, or people accidentally letting a killer instinct loose during play for people who get into brawls or similar. Even horrific crimes like genocide are committed out of a dual protective of kin/and aggressive of outsiders instinct.

The Wikipedia lists possible reasons, but we don’t actually know why animals do this when it’s actively harmful to them yet.

I don’t see how that supports that humans are one of a few species that kills for no reason, if we know that other animals kill in scenarios where it hurts them and we don’t actually commonly kill each other for no reason.

 reply
1
edited

Tbh, I used that phrasing specifically because you were snippy about someone else making a claim based on their own experience and I was trying to prod you about the evidence you’re using.

Good point. Yeah, and I was kinda rushing through my replies in general at that point, much of that due to… well.

When people kill each other “for no reason,” there’s often still a reason (though not an excuse)- territory in the case of gang or murder of romantic partners…

Sure, I get it. Thing is, we’re talking about species-wide behaviors. Not personal vendettas, and so forth. We naked apes are absolutely captured upon that shizzle, without question.

What I said still holds perfectly true. And–

if we know that other animals kill in scenarios where it hurts them and we don’t actually commonly kill each other for no reason.

Like I said above, animals can be ‘excessive killers’ for a variety of known, documented reasons. Not to mention, we naked apes absolutely DO commonly kill each other for bullshit reasons, unless perhaps you’re a NAZI (etc) apologist…? In which case it’s VASTLY more terrible, egregious, and anti-life as we know it.

 reply
1

Deleted by moderator

 reply
2

The fundamental problem with random / unnecessary aggression upon different species, for no real, apparent reason, is that it certainly carries inherent risk. Risk of personal injury and risk of disease introduction is just for starters, and the regular goal of most species is to live and reproduce.

If you understand the very Theory of Evolution, then you’ll understand why most animals don’t typically take such unnecessary risks. Cost-benefit, and all that, with science and observable, known facts coming foremost.

 reply
1

Deleted by moderator

 reply
0

Not to my knowledge, as a zoophile and someone who’s been trying to be curious, for many decades.

Feel free to present your list of science papers and documented, science-encounters you can back up, of course…

 reply
0

Recent, ongoing observations of the past 12 years…

 reply
1

So… not so “recent,” and data that’s already been out there for a while? Implying that this latest thing likely isn’t the first nibble..?

 reply
1
Insert image