Are human beings more aggressive than animals?

Question

Man must be the most aggressive and cruel of all living creatures. We may say a violent man is behaving "like a beast", but, in fact, no beast behaves as violently as man. When a territorial animal or bird intrudes on the territory of another creature of the same species, the latter will only perform some hostile gestures to warn off the intruder. Nevertheless, should a fight follow, neither creature will be badly hurt, for the loser will save himself by making a gesture of submission. Normally one animal will only kill another for food, and rarely does an animal kill a member of its own species.
2 If, however, an animal finds itself in abnormal conditions, it may show abnormal aggressiveness. A tiger that once came out of the jungle into a village and attacked a man was later found to have an injured paw that had evidently prevented it from hunting its usual prey. If it had not had this disability it would have undoubtedly stayed in the jungle and hunted for food in the customary way. Animals in zoos are kept in cages and often become more aggressive than they would be in the wild. If the caged lion, for example, were free to wander on the grassy plains of Africa, it would be continually active, ranging over long distances, hunting in family groups. In the zoo it is probably better fed and cared for, but it is evidently bored and frustrated for lack of company.
3 Some zoologists and psychologists compare modern man to a caged lion. Living conditions in crowded cities, they say, are similar to those of animals in a zoo and make the inhabitants unusually aggressive. If the human population had not increased so rapidly, people would have had more space and freedom. In prehistoric times a group of about 60 people had many kilometres of empty land to wander and search for food in. If conditions had remained thus, man might have been no more aggressive than his fellow creatures. As it is, it is possible for as many as 30,000 people to be working in a single office-building. It is not surprising if in these conditions people behave aggressively towards each other. In fact, it is almost impossible for them to behave otherwise. Man must have become more aggressive over the years as the world population has increased.
4 However, aggression in itself is not necessarily a bad thing. Some psychologists believe that aggression is a basic human instinct that must be satisfied. If constructive means are not available to satisfy this instinct, man will turn to destructive means. The impulse to assert himself has enabled him to survive in a dangerous world, but, ironically, he is now likely to destroy his own species unless alternative, non-violent ways of expressing aggression can be found. In fact, it is growing more and more difficult for people to assert themselves as individuals, as towns, nations and organizations become steadily bigger, with authority increasingly centralized and remote. A man who may once have been a self-employed craftsman, master of his own trade, might now have a boring job in a factory. A small firm that once worked as a team to produce high-quality goods is likely to be absorbed into a vast organization where their work is mechanical and there is no possibility for personal expression. Unable in these conditions to channel their aggression into creative work, people will probably express it through resentment and anger. At the international level an accumulation of hostile emotions finally finds expression in large-scale impersonal warfare. A man who would hesitate to hit another person in front of his eyes may kill thousands of people by dropping a bomb from a plane; to him they are too remote to be human beings, but are merely figures on a chart of his routine job.
5 Nevertheless, it might be possible at least to improve the situation. The encouragement of competition in all possible fields should tend to diminish the likelihood of war rather than increase it. In his book Human Aggression, Anthony Storr suggested that the United Nations should organize international competitions in sports and also for the best designed house or hospital, or the safest car. Even the enormous amount of money and energy devoted to the space race is, he says, to be welcomed, for this kind of competition can be regarded as similar to the ritual conflicts of animals. Only if hostility and aggression can be expressed in constructive activity and non-violent competition, will the human race be able to survive.

Answer 1

I think cognitive thinking and instinctual thinking can not be compared so simply. This question is like asking if apples are fruitier than bananas. Both animals and humans are agressive alike if locked in a battle, and it just depends: thinking power .vs. sheer physical power

Answer 2

Well we could be behaving like animals because we are animals. We just have a more advance social structure, if that is an advantage. I guess I agree with your friend, "what can you expect"? Here's a thought, if we, meaning the human race in its entirety, are such an advanced bunch, then why have't we come up with a written language that shows voice inflection? The same sentence read with different tonal qualities have different meaning. It would be very useful to be able to get the meaning you want, without having a vocabulary like M Webster!

Answer 3

Very well put, except your animal facts are a little lacking. Yes we are by far the most violent "animals"! Other animals do show violent behavior towards other animals!! Such as chimps. which are known to wage war on other troops of chimps, and have even shown severe aggression towards members of their own troops including young, just because they smashed their finger when trying to bust open a nut!! There are members of the ant family that also wage war on other colonies of ants. I myself had a dog that watched another dog approach our yard from a long distance down the street. My dog was at my feet on the front porch. My dog didn't make a move until the other dog touched our lawn. Despite my scolding, my dog launched an attack and made a mad dash towards the other dog of which was much larger than mine!! I didn't get to worried because it usualy ends in a lil bluff display in which the trespassing" less dominant dog of the yard" backs off. Not this time. For some unknown reason my dog never stopped. My dog ran right over this intruder and bulldozed him to the ground, then proceeded to stand over the top of the intruder and hold him by the throat for quite a few minutes, never leaving a mark. I was much to young and the intruder prob. weighed more than me, so i couldn't get in between. The intruder was released and backed up and out of the yard. However,..........as far as I know, we are the only animal to wage war on other animals not of our own species!

Answer 4

With all this dialogue, it pretty well answers your own question, but personally, I know a few humans that I can easily classify as more aggressive than animals.
In fact, they really do need to be confined behind bars.

Answer 5

We're animals too, you wannabe novelist nit-wit

Answer 6

depends on the animal and depends on the human being.

Answer 7

After reading so much. yes.