| --- |
| title: "House Oversight: Estate Documents (Nov 12) (HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012786)" |
| source: "House Oversight: Estate Documents (Nov 12)" |
| sourceUrl: "https://www.justice.gov/epstein" |
| date: "2026-01-01" |
| category: "House Oversight" |
| eftaNumber: "HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012786" |
| ocrPages: 1 |
| ocrChars: 3054 |
| ocrElapsed: 0.0 |
| parseTier: "external-legacy" |
| engine: "engine undisclosed (ep-nov-12.greg.technology mirror)" |
| externalSource: "greg-ep-nov-12" |
| externalLicense: "not granted" |
| externalCredit: "ep-nov-12.greg.technology" |
| externalUrl: "https://ep-nov-12.greg.technology" |
| --- |
| |
| then relentlessly hunt them down. When they catch the victim, the attack is brutal, focused on body parts |
| that are necessary for moving, communicating and reproducing. The attackers commonly have a |
| numerical advantage over the victims, a ratio of at least three to one. This power imbalance reduces the |
| costs of the attack by making it almost impossible for the victim to retaliate. Proof of this cost-benefit |
| analysis comes from the fact that the attacking party rarely incurs injuries, whereas the victims rarely |
| escape alive. The benefit of these attacks is that the attacking community gains access to additional |
| resources by weakening the competitive strength of their neighbors. In a well documented case from Jane |
| Goodall's site in Gombe, Tanzania, one chimpanzee community literally eliminated their competitors in |
| the neighboring community, absorbing the remaining individuals and land. Though such attacks are |
| certainly not a daily affair, they occur with sufficient frequency and benefits to create a selective |
| advantage for the winners. |
| The suite of behaviors that accompany coalitionary killing in chimpanzees has led several |
| scientists, most notably Wrangham, to argue that this form of lethal aggression in chimpanzees is an |
| adaptation, with deep parallels to human warfare. On this view, we inherited the upgrade to version 1.5 |
| lethal aggression. |
| The claim that our capacity for killing, especially in war, is an evolved adaptation, is anathema to |
| many, scholars in the humanities and social sciences. The visceral antagonism is triggered by the belief |
| that biological explanations imply inevitability, and provide an excuse for the atrocities we create. For |
| these scholars, war, and more generally, the high levels of killing observed among human populations, are |
| recent, cultural concoctions, born out of human intelligence, the invention of projectile weapons, and high |
| population density, to name a few. From this perspective, biology plays no meaningful role in our |
| understanding of human violence. From this perspective, killing in chimpanzees looks nothing like killing |
| in humans. This attitude echoes the famous 1986 Seville Statement on violence in which a group of |
| distinguished scientists, including the ethologist Robert Hinde, the geneticist John Paul Scott, and the |
| biological anthropologist Richard Leakey, sidelined biology with the following five statements: |
| 1. "It is scientifically incorrect to say that we have inherited a tendency to make |
| war from our animal ancestors." |
| 2. "It is scientifically incorrect to say that war or any other violent behaviour is |
| genetically programmed into our human nature." |
| 3. "It is scientifically incorrect to say that in the course of human evolution there |
| has been a selection for aggressive behaviour more than for other kinds of |
| behaviour." |
| 4. "It is scientifically incorrect to say that humans have a 'violent brain'." |
| 5. "It is scientifically incorrect to say that war is caused by 'instinct' or any single |
| motivation." |
| Hauser |
| Chapter 1. Nature's secrets |
| 40 |
| HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012786 |
|
|
