Do You Think That All Human Aggression Is In Self-Defense?

From a historical standpoint, I'd say manifest destiny was not in self defense.

 

You could call that "empire building." And I'm not sure that was really an attack on the Native's as it was a desire for land. The negative effects it had on the Native's was just a side effect.

 

If you distill everything so far that it's meaningless and irrelevant, then yes.

So?

 

It's called making analogies and drawing conclusions. Lumping large amount of information into theories.

Everyone's doing it... it's the "hep" thing to do!

 

Aggression is one thing.

Self-defense is another thing.

That's a simple question.

 

Yes, but all aggression is in self-defense. Whether it be real or imagined (such as Timothy McVeigh thought he was protecting himself, or so he says).

 

Nope. You're simply wrong.

 

What is an instance of aggression that is not self-defense? Or revenge? Or something that is a reaction?

 

The Knockout Game.

 

So what is the explanation for that behavior? If it is not self-defense, and not a "subconscious death wish" as Sigmund Freud would tell you.

And it's not greed because there is no monetary reward.

Maybe they are "defending" their egos? And they feel they have to do that in order to feel good about themselves?

I really want this theory to hold..... Lol.

(and BTW, anyone calling me a troll.... read this and other things I have said lately and you will see that I am not a troll, right?)

 

They may be if The Knockout Game starts with a dare.

 

I read up on it and it said that if they didn't knock the person out, then his "friends" would knock him out.

So does my theory still hold?

They maybe are just defending their egos?

Does this account for Alexander the Great.

Let's have a brainstorm session with everyone reading this thread. What are all the examples of violence that could be considered not in self-defense?

Mine: Alexander the Great (and other empire builders), and the knockout game.

Even the bloodiest wars the world has ever known were in self-defense at the very root of them. World War II was basically caused by the harsh conditions imposed on Germany at the end of World War I, and WW-I was caused by growing European industrial empires competing with each other.

 

At least that word was in the dictionary! He's getting better!

 

But people ARE born that way. I once went to a talk at my local university that discussed a study made on agression in children. The data showed that between ages 0 and 5, children had instinctual agression (hitting each other, fighting over toys, so on and so forth), and the from 5 on, as the ''conscience'' developed, it was only then that agression became a choice, which was obviously influenced by environment in previous and current years.

 

Fighting OVER TOYS... meaning that you can call it self-defense.

My theory is that bacteria are inherently selfish because they lack the ability to even know that other bacteria (or anything even exist)... then when organisms evolved that had consciousness, they could see that the other person (or animal, etc.) existed and it took time to see that they should not harm that person...

When trees inhabit a new piece of land... they compete with each other without even knowing that each other exists. One tree causes the non-survival of another. It didn't do it on purpose. It was just feeding it's cells. A tree does not even know that it, itself, even exists.

For example, insect "families" eat each other until only a few survive (in some species).

 

How can a living thing not know it exists.

 

Because it doesn't have a nervous system or consciousness.

 

Don't quit your day job.

 

What of when aggression is institutionalized / and the active aggressor is only an individual actor habituated
to a role - thus , passive and innocent ??

 

@OP: all aggression 'should' be in self defense, but it's not. if there were no offensive aggression there would be no need for self defense in the first place anyway, at least from other humans. unfortunately there are some pretty sorry individuals in the world that use their aggression to intimidate or take advantage of people, to take what they want to benefit themselves no matter what negative effect their actions have on others. there is also a small number of people that enjoy hurting others, or those they perceive as "weak" for no reason, or for no obvious gain except the enjoyment they get from doing so. perhaps it makes them feel more powerful somehow.