Which species of primates do you think is the most aggressiv

[Pawelk198604]

In my opinion Homo Sapiens Sapiens rule in this category:D

[szputnyik]

I think the Common Chimpanzee is much more aggressive, since it remains even as an adult at the emotional level of a 2-year-old human child. Humans without serious mental disorders can moderate themselves, count to ten and cool off when provoked, while a Chimpanzee can always throw a potentially deadly hissy fit.

[Camacha]

Humans throw hissy fits all the time and those are not potentially deadly, they are very deadly. We even gave up our muscles to feed that hungry, inventive brain so that we can come up with even better ways of killing each other and everything else.

[szputnyik]

You're missing the point. Humans have a brain capable of moderating an outburst of violent emotions. The Chimpanzee simply isn't capable of coming up with a reaction other than an immediate, violent attack.

[Camacha]

You're missing the point. Humans have a brain capable of moderating an outburst of violent emotions. The Chimpanzee simply isn't capable of coming up with a reaction other than an immediate, violent attack.

I am not missing the point, I think you are overestimating the power of humans to control violent emotions and underestimating Chimpanzee behaviour. The fact that we are maybe a little more cunning does not make us less violent. Rather than a small fist fight, we willingly engage in large scale conflicts with huge loss of life. I see little capacity for moderation there.

[ecat]

There looks to be no contest:

Muggings: I guess most primates don't have much worth taking. Humans win.

Murder: Humans win.

Persecution: Humans win.

War: Humans win.

Genocide: Humans win.

Coercion: Humans win.

The list goes on and that's just acts against others of our species.

[ZedNova]

We're almost certainly the most aggressive, that's why we're at the top of the food chain.

[Camacha]

We're almost certainly the most aggressive, that's why we're at the top of the food chain.

We are probably agressive because we are at the top of the food chain too. Intelligence is a trait often seen in predators. It is one of the reasons we should be careful with alien life that visits us.

[RuBisCO]

Humans have always be violent, every studied tribal society: its not all "harmony with nature"... well actually it is, the violence helps keep the population in check, then again other anthropologist disagree: http://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/feb/03/jared-diamond-clash-tribal-peoples

Chimps have been observed doing the same thing: forming tribes, going off and hunting down other chimp tribes and riping them appart limb from limb, so its very likely we human have been violently tribalist long before we even came down from the trees! Nations and wars are just developed versions of our tribalist instincts to form groups and fear, hate and want to dominate and oppress the "other" groups.

[lajoswinkler]

If we define "most agressive" as having the worst temper that leads to uncontrolled deadly violence (which is more applicable than examination of culture and history), then it's probably the chimpanzee. They're horrible.

[Napaeozapus]

Aggression wouldn't have to be just physical violence. Humans do have the mental capacity to not be aggressive so I don't know if I would consider them aggressive. People are definitely driven to be aggressive by those who are allowed to run things. Then you have psychopaths/sociopaths to consider and they are not always just people you would expect to see in prison.

Best to be careful with considering humans in general as being aggressive though. If we consider ourselves to just be naturally aggressive then we dismiss the possibility for change.

Here is a related video I remembered:

[RuBisCO]

Just because we have violent instincts does not mean we can't override them, heck civlization its self has been a fight against nature, not simply external nature but internal nature as well, and extended lifespans and high standard of living have been the rewards of that fight.

[ecat]

Aggression wouldn't have to be just physical violence. Humans do have the mental capacity to not be aggressive so I don't know if I would consider them aggressive. People are definitely driven to be aggressive by those who are allowed to run things. Then you have psychopaths/sociopaths to consider and they are not always just people you would expect to see in prison.

Best to be careful with considering humans in general as being aggressive though. If we consider ourselves to just be naturally aggressive then we dismiss the possibility for change.

Here is a related video I remembered:

Humans also have the mental capacity to justify anything. We are naturally aggressive, thoughtless outside our own needs and in a position of immense power. Accepting that we collectively have problems is the first step towards finding the solutions.

Nice video

[AlamoVampire]

We're almost certainly the most aggressive, that's why we're at the top of the food chain.

no. we are decidedly NOT at the top of the food chain. We are deluded into believing that we are the apex predators on this planet, when, we are in fact not. Take away our guns, our knives, and our weapons, we become weak. Take the predators on the African savanna. THEY need no extra weapons to kill. They are BORN predators. Take the sharks and other predators in the oceans, same with them. What nature BUILT INTO THEM is all THEY NEED. No, we are pretenders to that throne. NATURE is the apex predator, we are merely the children with a stick poking the hornets nest.

THESE are top of the food chain. NOT us.

any one of those above, can, and WILL kill us, HAVE killed us if and WHEN they desire.

Edited July 13, 2014 by AlamoVampire

[DaveofDefeat]

no. we are decidedly NOT at the top of the food chain. We are deluded into believing that we are the apex predators on this planet, when, we are in fact not. Take away our guns, our knives, and our weapons, we become weak. Take the predators on the African savanna. THEY need no extra weapons to kill. They are BORN predators. Take the sharks and other predators in the oceans, same with them. What nature BUILT INTO THEM is all THEY NEED. No, we are pretenders to that throne. NATURE is the apex predator, we are merely the children with a stick poking the hornets nest.

THESE are top of the food chain. NOT us.

Take away there teeth and claws and then they become weak.

We are apex predators because we were born with the brain nature gave us to create tools to aid us.

[Camacha]

uncontrolled deadly violence

Still sounds like human behaviour. Chimps can be violent, but it is rarely lethal. It happens, but it seems to be somewhat exceptional.

Edited July 13, 2014 by Camacha

[Camacha]

THEY need no extra weapons to kill. They are BORN predators.

You missed an important point made earlier: intelligence is one typical trademark of the hunter. Anything that hunts is smart, or at least smarter than its prey. Look at wolves, look at orcas, look at hunting spiders even - they all show remarkable behaviour that indicates intelligence. Humans are smart and whether you see it as cause or effect, it makes humans hunters. Near the top, but by now probably at the top, of the food chain.

Our lack of claws is insignificant since we made them ourselves from sticks and flint. There is even evidence that we traded bodily strength in the form of muscles for accelerated brain growth, trading one hunting tool for a more powerful one.

Edited July 13, 2014 by Camacha

[Camacha]

we do NOT have the STRENGTH of predators that claim the throne.

Please, read what other people write instead of just repeating your own convictions. I have written a couple of times now that there is evidence that humans traded muscle mass for brain growth. We actually have relatively weak and puny muscles compared to animals close to us. This might very well be an adaptation to allow our brain to develop faster and bigger, as the decline in muscle mass did not only happen at the same time, it also happened at an accelerated rate. We do not have the strength of apes because we developed a special adaptation. One that allows us to outsmart and rule over any other predator. With typical human hubris we make the rules, these other predators only get us when we mess up.

Also, we have an almost unsurpassed stamina. We have unusual adaptations like sweating and walking upright. We are a species that evolved to hunt by chasing prey to exhaustion. That can not be called weak by any standard. We are (relatively) smart and we will chase you down until you will simply die from running away. If that is not scary I do not know what is. Sure, lions are massive bundles of muscle that can take down huge beasts, but if you have ever seen a real lion you will know then lie and sleep about 98% of the time, as he can simply not afford to be active all the time. Every species has its strengths and weaknesses.

Until we can do what they do unaided, and our OWN BIOLOGY will NEVER permit that with out a HUGE overhaul of what we are, we can not now, nor EVER be the king of the food chain.

We do do this unaided, our brain is our adaption, and therefore our technology too. It is part of how nature made us and what we are. We did not need to evolve claws or fangs, because we found a way to acquire there benefits more quickly and in a more flexible way. Whatever we need, we make for ourselves. We do not need to wait for nature to adapt out bodies, me make the adaptations ourselves. Elephants can communicate over longish distances by infrasound, we developed world wide communication in two or three generations.

To view technology as something outside of evolution is silly. We do not need muscle, claw or fang, we have our brain, stamina and technology.

Could you maybe stop using capitals mid sentence? In internet speak it means yelling and that makes it rather unpleasant to read.

Edited July 13, 2014 by Camacha

[magnemoe]

You missed an important point made earlier: intelligence is one typical trademark of the hunter. Anything that hunts is smart, or at least smarter than its prey. Look at wolves, look at orcas, look at hunting spiders even - they all show remarkable behaviour that indicates intelligence. Humans are smart and whether you see it as cause or effect, it makes humans hunters. Near the top, but by now probably at the top, of the food chain.

Our lack of claws is insignificant since we made them ourselves from sticks and flint. There is even evidence that we traded bodily strength in the form of muscles for accelerated brain growth, trading one hunting tool for a more powerful one.

And it paid off well, humans was hunting mammoths regularly over 50.000 years ago, and they was the only predator going after adult mammoths.

None other even of the large ice age predators was going after dying or baby mammoths separated from the pack.

We have used tools for more than a million years so we evolved for it.

Might also explain why we so peaceful, a human with an chimpanzee style behavior and a spear would be very dangerous and have a high chance of being killed by the others either during the fight or later,

Then talking about aggressive animals we should not forget large herbivores, most predators is pretty restrained as they has to judge chance for a catch up against dangers.

An lion who charges packs of elephants don't reproduce. For a large herbivore they usual has little to loose on being aggressive.

The rhino is legendary for its aggressiveness, hippos are also very dangerous, think its the most dangerous mammal but this might also be as its easy to get into a pack with a small boat.

[78stonewobble]

I don't think we'd be much different to another predatory species, that became intelligent and developed down roughly the same technological lines.

Maybe intelligent herbivores would be a little different?

[shynung]

Intelligent herbivores would discover farming before anything else, I think.

[Camacha]

Like said, intelligence is often developed for practical purposes - outsmarting your prey. Unless we are dealing with a planet full of smart plants, intelligent herbivores are a less likely development. Maybe that some other type of pressure could trigger such a thing.

[magnemoe]

I don't think we'd be much different to another predatory species, that became intelligent and developed down roughly the same technological lines.

Maybe intelligent herbivores would be a little different?

Yes, they would be, herbivores has two weaknesses, less energy rich diet and less challenges. However the major intellectual challenge for primitive humans was other humans.

Elephants are pretty smart, probably goes with the size, it don't cost much to have a big brain if you are so large and the large size require that they live long.

They are also very social who give challenges.

The other option to something big would be an herbivore who lives on fruits and berries or other energy rich diet, lots of apes does this.

[Scotius]

Oh, we are apex predators on Earth - there is no doubt. Humanity is the only species that can succesfully hunt down every other species, in every biome. White sharks, orcas, lions, crocodiles, eagles - give us time to make some necessary tools and we will kill them. Even bacteria and viruses are much more specialised and constrained to their chosen prey. Our brains are the only real requirement. Take away lion's claws and fangs, and he's as good as dead. We need only to find a stick and couple of stones to quickly rearm ourselves. Let me repeat: we can kill anything, anytime, anywhere.

Are we most aggressive primates? I think not. Out closest relatives, chimps are capable of similiar level of violence (including infanticide, cannibalism, gang , genocide and other unpleasantness) as we are, but they apparently lack moral and social constraints we developed. Of course it is not so clear cut. Bonobo chimpanzees managed to find other ways to resolve conflicts without resorting to violence - just like we did. They literally live following "Make love, not war" slogan

[xcorps]

DaveofDefeat: We may be smart, but, that alone, does NOT make us the TOP of the food chain. Sure, we kill with scary efficiency, so much so, we are eradicating species with an efficiency never before seen. The TRUE top of the food chain, kills to survive, not for sport. We do BOTH.

Camacha: We may have tools, we may have intelligence, but, we lack a VITAL factor: We are STILL weak. We do NOT have the hearing of predators, we do NOT have the eyesight of predators, we do NOT have the STRENGTH of predators that claim the throne. In the daylight we are strong, sure. In the NIGHT? We are as weak as newborn babies. We need artificial amplification of light at NIGHT to see. They do NOT. We can not move with the speed needed to kill unaided. They do not.

We hit maybe HALF of the criteria to claim the throne. the TRUE masters of the hunt, the apex animals I showed above, meet EACH OF THEM. Until we can do what they do unaided, and our OWN BIOLOGY will NEVER permit that with out a HUGE overhaul of what we are, we can not now, nor EVER be the king of the food chain. To think we are, is to disrespect nature, and nature, when disrespected is more than willing to teach you humility.

OH please. CALL me when A grizzly BEAR can launch a PREDATOR drone STRIKE from A THOUSAND miles AWAY. CALL me when A SHARK CAN find A BASKETBALL from ORBIT. CALL ME when a crocodile CAN exterminate a CITY with the PRESS of a BUTTON. LET me know when an EAGLE can FLY at MACH 4.

NATURE cannot BE OFfendED. BecAUse NAturE Is NOT an Entity.

Your entire position is nonsense.