The Great Debate: ORIGINS OF VIOLENCE (OFFICIAL) - (Part 1/2)
Summary
TLDRこのスクリプトは、人間の暴力の起源と、それを超越するための科学的な理解を提供する「起源プロジェクト」の5周年を祝うイベントを紹介しています。スピーカーは、霊長類学者から政治学者まで、暴力の生物学的、心理学的、社会心理学的要因を探求し、非暴力的な抵抗の効果や、戦争の時代が過ぎ去った可能性について議論しています。このイベントは、暴力に関する従来の常識に挑戦し、より平和な未来への道を開く可能性を示しています。
Takeaways
- 🎉 5年前のこの日に起源プロジェクトが始まり、80人の世界有数の科学者、学者、公衆知識人を招いて、人間の探求のほぼすべての分野をカバーする基礎的な問題について有意義な方法で議論することを目指しました。
- 🌟 今夜のイベントは起源プロジェクトの5周年を祝うもので、2つの素晴らしいパネルが集まっており、私たちのミッションである「起源を理解することによって未来を変える」に関連する問題について議論します。
- 🔬 スティーブン・ピンカーは、認知心理学のリーダーであり、ハーバードの教授でもあり、ニューヨーク・タイムズのベストセラーリストに3冊の書籍を発表した公衆知識人です。
- 🗣️ 暴力は人類の歴史から始まっており、なぜ暴力が存在するのか、過去と異なる現在の状況は何か、そしてそれは未来にわたって続くかどうかを問うことが重要です。
- 🦍 リチャード・ランガムは、チンパンジーの暴力行為についての研究を行い、彼らが他のグループの個体を狩ることや、その行為が人間と類似していることを指摘しています。
- 🧠 アドリアン・レインは、犯罪者と正常な人々の脳の画像を比較した研究を行い、暴力行為を抑制する前頭葉の活動低下と、道徳感を生成する扁桃体の縮小との関連性に言及しています。
- 🤝 エリカ・チェノウィスは、非暴力抵抗が暴力的な抵抗よりも効果的であると主張し、特に過去40年間で非暴力キャンペーンの効果が高まり、暴力的なインシューレンシーは減少傾向にあることを示しました。
- 🌐 ジョン・ミューラーは、戦争がほぼ消滅したと主張し、1945年以来開発された国々間で戦争がゼロであるという統計を強調しています。
- 📉 内戦の数は1990年代初頭にピークを迎え、その後徐々に減少しており、現在では非常に低いレベルで推移しています。
- 🕊️ 非暴力抵抗が成功する鍵は、広範な市民の参加であり、3.5%以上の人口が関与する運動は100%の成功率を持っています。
- 🌍 ヨーロッパや開発された地域では、戦争が理性的、または潜在意識的に考えられなくなっているとされ、戦争は廃絶された奴隷制のように、徐々に人々の意識から消えつつある可能性があります。
Q & A
オリジンズプロジェクトの目的は何ですか?
-オリジンズプロジェクトの目的は、人間の起源について理解することによって未来を変えることです。それは、宇宙の起源から生命、そして人類の起源までの基本的な質問について、世界中の優れた科学者や学者を招いて意義のある方法で議論することを目指しています。
スティーブン・ピンカーはどのような人物ですか?
-スティーブン・ピンカーは認知心理学のリーダーであり、ハーバード大学の教授で、ニューヨーク・タイムズのベストセラーリストに3冊の書籍を発表した公共知識分子です。彼はオリジンズプロジェクトの友人であり、2009年9月にイベントを開催しました。
暴力の科学的理解とは何を意味しますか?
-暴力の科学的理解とは、暴力の事実や原因を科学的に理解することであり、生物学的因素、例えば暴力のための遺伝子や大脳の領域を含めたりもしますが、それらだけでなく、経験データに基づいて仮説をテストすることです。
チンパンジーにおける暴力行為の特徴は何ですか?
-チンパンジーの男性グループは、自分の範囲の端に行き、隣接グループの個体を探し、狩り、危険にさらして害を与え、おそらく殺害する可能性があります。これは人間の暴力行為と驚くほど類似しています。
ターラナ族の人々はどのような人々ですか?彼らはなぜ戦争を仕掛けますか?
-ターラナ族は東アフリカの遊牧民で、他の部族から牛を略奪します。彼らの戦争は、資源の獲得を進化の解釈として見るよりも、人間の協力の進化的新しい現象を物語っています。
脳の前額葉が暴力行為にどのように影響を与えますか?
-脳の前額葉は衝動的な行動を抑制し、感情を調節する役割を持っています。前額葉の機能が低下している場合、制御不能な感情が表面化し、人殺しなどの暴力行為につながる可能性があります。
非暴力抵抗が成功する可能性はどのくらいですか?
-非暴力抵抗は、暴力的インサルゲンシーよりも2倍以上効果的であり、特に過去40年間で効果が高まっており、より頻繁に行われています。
テロリズムは効果的ですか?
-テロリズムの成功率は非常に低く、3%を超えることはほとんどありません。これはテロリズムが政治的な変化をもたらす有効な手段ではないことを示唆しています。
ヨーロッパでの長い平和期間の理由は何ですか?
-ヨーロッパでの長い平和期間は、戦争のアイデアが理性的に考えるとコストが高すぎると判断される「理性的に考えられない」状況、または戦争が考慮されない「潜在意識的に考えられない」状況に落ち着いたことに起因する可能性があります。
内戦の数が減少した理由は何ですか?
-内戦の数が減少した理由は、1990年代初頭に達したピークからの徐々に減少傾向にあること、および現在では1回に4〜5回しか起こっていないことから、より低いレベルが持続していることが挙げられます。
未来に向けて、戦争は消滅する可能性がありますか?
-戦争は完全には消滅しないかもしれませんが、ヨーロッパや開発された地域での平和期間が非常に長いこと、内戦の減少、そして戦争のアイデア自体が徐々に消滅していることから、戦争が望ましくない選択肢になる可能性があります。
Outlines
🎉 起源プロジェクトの5周年
起源プロジェクトの5周年を祝うセレモニーが開催され、プロジェクトの目的は人間の起源を理解することによって未来を変えることです。これまで80人の科学者や学者を集めて様々な分野の基礎的な問題を議論し、公衆3000人が科学を聴くことを願っており、その成功から5年が経ちました。今夜は2つのパネルディスカッションがあり、1つは暴力の起源に関する議論で、もう1つは合成生物学や医学、進化、健康技術、機械知能などについて話します。
🤔 暴力の科学的理解
暴力の科学的理解を追求し、人間の暴力の起源を超えた、地球上に存在する前からの暴力の起源を探ります。リチャード・ランガムはチンパンジーの暴力行為を研究しており、彼らは土地を巡って戦う一方で、特に男性が隣接グループの単独の個体を狩り、危険にさらして殺害する行為をとることもあります。これは古代の狩猟民と驚くほど似ていると指摘され、自然選択が人間の暴力の心理的構造に影響を与えている可能性があります。
🐃 獲物を巡る争いと人間の暴力
サラ・マシューは東アフリカの遊牧民ターラナを研究しており、彼らは他部族から牛を略奪する争いを繰り広げていますが、その背後にある進化的な説明は獲物そのものではなく、人間の協力の形態に関するものです。ターラナは道徳的感情を通じて協力を組織しており、部族のメンバーが戦場で犠牲になろうとも、彼らの道徳的心理は彼らを戦闘に駆り立てています。
🧠 暴力の神経科学的基礎
アドリアン・レインは、犯罪者と正常な人々の脳の画像を比較した研究を行い、殺人犯の前頭葉皮質の活動が低下していることを発見しました。前頭葉は衝動的な行動を抑制し、感情を調節する役割を果たしており、その機能低下が暴力行為につながると指摘しています。また、精神性犯罪者や無良心の個体には、道徳感や罪悪感を生み出すための脳のアミイダが小さくなっていることが示されています。
🐟 脳を変える食と暴力の抑制
魚油を含むオメガ-3脂肪酸は脳の構造と機能に欠かせない栄養素であり、投獄者への投与が犯罪行為を約34%減少させた研究結果があります。この話は皮肉にも聞こえるかもしれませんが、若い世代に適切な栄養を提供することで、社会リスク要因や生物学的风险要因を持つ子供たちに対して早期介入と犯罪予防が行えるかもしれません。
🕊️ 非暴力抵抗の効果
エリカ・チェノウィスは非暴力抵抗が政治変革をもたらす方法として有効であることを研究しています。非暴力抵抗は武装されない市民がストライキ、抗議、ボイコットなど多様な協調戦術を用いて、直接的な物理的傷害を加えることなく、相手に対処する方法です。彼女の研究では、非暴力キャンペーンは暴力的インシューレンシーよりもはるかに効果的であり、特に最近ではその傾向が強まっていることを発見しました。
📉 戦争の減少と平和の到来
ジョン・ミューラーは戦争がほぼ存在しなくなったことを指摘しています。1945年以来、開発された国々間で戦争が起こった例はほとんどゼロであり、これは驚くべき発展です。ヨーロッパはかつて最も戦争好きだった地域でしたが、現在は長期にわたる平和を享受しています。また、冷戦の終結後も国際戦争は大幅に減少し、内戦も1990年代以降徐々に減少傾向にありました。
🌏 戦争の廃絶と未来への道
戦争が廃絶されるかもしれないという希望的な視点をジョン・ミューラーは示しており、18世紀末に奴隷制度が廃止されたように、戦争も徐々に人々に拒絶されるようになるかもしれません。戦争をやめる運動は1889年頃に始まっており、現在はヨーロッパをはじめとする開発された地域では戦争は考えられない選択肢となっています。
Mindmap
Keywords
💡起源プロジェクト
💡暴力
💡協力
💡非暴力抵抗
💡進化心理学
💡脳科学
💡民間紛争
💡戦争の退行性
💡犯罪生物学
💡社会変化
Highlights
起源项目五周年庆典,汇集了顶尖科学家、学者和公共知识分子,探讨基础问题。
探讨了暴力的起源和本质,以及它在人类历史中的地位。
Steven Pinker提出,尽管暴力存在,但科学理解有助于我们更好地认识和应对它。
Richard Wrangham讨论了黑猩猩的暴力行为,以及它与人类暴力的相似之处。
Sarah Mathew提出,人类战争是一种进化上的新颖现象,与动物界的战争行为不同。
Adrien Raine通过脑部扫描研究了暴力行为与大脑活动之间的关系。
Erica Chenoweth的研究显示,非暴力抵抗比武装斗争更有效,尤其是在现代社会。
John Mueller认为,战争在发达国家几乎已经停止存在,这是一个积极的趋势。
讨论了非暴力抵抗的成功案例,以及它们对社会长期影响的重要性。
强调了社会化过程在形成军事行为中的作用,尤其是在奖励勇敢行为的文化中。
探讨了人类合作的进化,以及它如何影响我们的道德心理和对内群体的保护。
讨论了大脑的多个中心如何影响暴力行为的发生,以及如何通过社会环境改变这些行为。
提出了关于暴力行为的生物学基础,以及它对惩罚和预防犯罪的意义。
讨论了恐怖主义的失败率,以及为什么它不是实现政治目标的有效手段。
强调了非暴力抵抗在历史上的成功,以及它在现代社会中的潜力。
提出了关于战争可能变得过时的观点,以及这一变化背后的社会和心理因素。
讨论了如何通过科学理解来控制和减少暴力,以及这对未来社会的意义。
Transcripts
than
well the best is here
now what a night we have planned for you
five years ago today actually we
inaugurated the origins project here in
this very Auditorium we just with an
experiment first we decided to ask the
question could we bring together 80 of
the world's greatest scientists Scholars
public
intellectuals whose Fields span almost
every area of human
inquiry and bring them together to
discuss foundational questions but in a
meaningful way and inform each
other and then we decided to ask the
question since these are the same
questions from the origin of the
universe the origins of Life the origins
of
humanity since these questions are the
same questions everyone asks themselves
could we fill a 3,000 seat Auditorium
with members of the public who are
willing to listen to science
now it's fair to say I think that
uh most people thought the answer to
both those questions was
no but here we are 5 years later thanks
to you we're continuing and it's
appropriate tonight to celebrate our
fifth anniversary by bringing together
two truly remarkable panels to discuss
issues that are really hit to the heart
of the mission of the origins project
that mission is changing our future by
understanding our Origins
now after the break we're going to have
a panel that's going to talk about the
future from synthetic
biology medicine Evolution Health
technology and machine
intelligence but before the break we're
going to have a panel this remarkable
panel that's going to deal with a
question that's really Central to our
existence
violence violence seems to have been a
part of human history from its beginning
and we need to ask some question why is
that the case
is the present different than the past
will it persist into the future those
are the kind of issues that we've
actually been discussing at a workshop
that the people here represent a
workshop that's been going on for the
last two days here at the
University now to put together a panel
dealing with that issue required a
remarkable
individual and we went to a person I
personally think is one of the most
significant intellects and intellectuals
of our president
generation he's also a friend of Origins
he was here in September 2009 to
inaugurate the event he's been here
since then he knew what we wanted to
achieve and he's a a man with a
remarkable dream
CV he's a leader in cognitive psychology
a chaired professor at
Harvard he's had three books on the New
York Times bestseller list and he is a
public intellectual in the true sense he
also one of the nicest people I know and
I'm very proud and happy to introduce
you to my friend Steven
Pinker
murder War riots terrorism
insurrections that I hope got your
attention ever since can we go back yes
ever since Cain slew Abel people have
deplored celebrated moralized and above
all been fascinated by violence violence
has been explained as a form of
entertainment for sadistic puppeteers on
high as a depraved and sinful human
choice and as a glorious expression of
manly heroism and
self-sacrifice but until recently
there's been little scientific knowledge
of The Facts of violence and little
scientific understanding of the causes
of violence the origins project has
brought together over this weekend a
diverse group of Scholars studying the
nature of violence and all of its
manifestations
by asking for a scientific understanding
of violence this does not necessarily
mean a uh search for biological factors
like genes for violence or areas of the
brain responsible for violence though it
does embrace that uh as well but rather
an
evidence-based understanding of violence
what are the facts of the different
categories of human aggression a search
for an explanation uh a lack of
satisfaction with the answer well that's
just the way it is and always has been
and the desire to test possible
explanations uh with empirical data uh
I'm going to get right to it uh the
topic of origins of violence implies
that we should not be satisfied with
merely the human origins of violence but
the origins of violence before our
species walk the earth and there is no
one better to discuss that than uh
Richard rangam one of the world's great
primatologists the Ruth Moore professor
of biological anthropology at Harvard
and the author of demonic males apes and
the origin of human
violence uh Richard I'm going to ask you
two questions which is uh which are what
do chimpanzees have to fight over and
what overlap do you think there is
between the kind of violence that you
have observed in chimpanzees and the
kind of violence that you have uh
observed in human
beings chimpanzees fight over ultimately
land but proximately they don't fight
over
anything one of the extraordinary things
about what we see from their behavior in
a variety of study sites across Africa
is that you don't have to have them
provoked by competition over a resource
competition over anything to have them
excited by the prospect of being violent
in a warlike context and when I say they
let's just be clear we're talking about
males to almost complete extent so a
coalition of males half a dozen will
leave the center of their range go to
the edge of range and look for
individuals uh on their own in
neighboring groups they will penetrate
into the uh territory of the neighboring
group and hunt and if they successfully
catch them uh dangerously harm and
likely kill that member of a neighboring
group so we're seeing something
astonishingly like what is sometimes
seen in humans and if I may uh this is
rather similar to what we see in some
hunters and gatherers nomadic hunters
and gatherers are of course a wonderful
model for our pre-agricultural past
prior to 10,000 years
ago and what is so uh fascinating is
that if you reduce the complexity of
understanding the hunters and gatherers
by taking away those hunters and
gatherers that are neighbored by Farmers
or state
societies and uh you look only at the
conditions where they have other hunters
and gatherers as their neighbors you see
an astonishing ly similar system to what
chimpanzees do which we can call
cowardly killing chimps never get into a
context of a fight with the neighboring
group where they risk getting wounded
the astonishing thing is that
chimpanzees in these small groups are
attacking an individual who is three or
four times as strong as a human is
fighting for his life and yet none of
the attackers will get a wound at all
and you get a very similar system with
nomadic hunters and gatherers where the
aim of the attacking party is to make a
deep braid into a neighboring group of a
different ethnolinguistic Society people
who speak a different language and uh
quickly find individuals kill and get
out of there before there's a chance
that they are going to get
hurt and in that we see apparently a
evidence of natural selection operating
on The evolutionary psychological
architecture of our species because if
chimpanzees are showing this system
where clearly there's nothing like the
cultural evolution of humans that's
important and if humans show a very
similar system then it's clear that
natural selection should be at the base
of what we see in humans now in the last
20 years we've been able to get
sufficient data on chimpanzees in
different places to look at was there
human disturbance that could have been
correlated with these um attacks and the
answer now is we know that uh the
pattern of aggression is related to the
number of males in the group and the
population density of the chimpanzees
but not to any factors of human
disturbance so thinking then about what
this means for the larger issues of of
the origins of human violence the one
big difference between humans and
chimpanzees that we've seen in this
hunter gatherer chimpanzee comparison
and that is that the hunters and
gatherers are more likely to die than
the chimpanzees are when they are being
the attackers and that is because they
take bigger risks and the evidence that
we've assembled is that the reason they
take those bigger risks is not because
of anything inherent in human biology
it's because a cultural system emerges
where you get great rewards for doing
something really daring in war and in
that we think we see the origins of the
socialization for military behavior that
ultimately becomes really devastating
once we cross the military
Horizon thank you Richard the uh your
illusion to hunters and gatherers uh
Parks back to an ancient debate one
that's several centuries old uh namely
what kind of violence do we see in
humans in the absence of the
contaminating factor of the of a
government of a leviathan a special
Authority with a monopoly on the use of
force which clearly doesn't give us a
clear picture of people's natural
tendencies to War and Peace uh several
hundred years ago Thomas Hobbs famously
speculated that uh before there was an
authority to keep people from each
other's throats uh the life of man
consisted of constant war of a war of
every man against every man and in such
condition the life of man was solitary
poor nasty brutish and short 100 years
later Jean jaac rouso countered that
nothing can be more uh peaceful than man
in his primitive State the so-called
doctrine of the noble or peaceful Savage
now neither Hobbs nor Russo had any idea
what what they were talking about they
were speculating from the armchair but
uh as Richard uh alluded to more
recently there have been studies of uh
the kinds and causes of violence in
people who are not under the control uh
of a state that brings us to our second
speaker uh Sarah Matthew assistant
professor in the school of human
evolution and social change here at
Arizona State University uh the local
representative of an extraordinary
collection of people here at ASU who
study uh violence and human nature in in
many manifestations now Sarah you uh
don't study hunter gatherers but you do
study uh pastoralists people who um keep
livestock and are live largely out of
the control of uh Central State my
questions for you are um who are the
turana the people that you study what do
they fight over and what lessons if any
do they hold for uh the evolution of
human
violence um so the turana are
pastoralist in East Africa and they are
um raiding other tribes for cows but I
want to make a counterintuitive argument
today that these resources the cows are
not really the evolutionary explanation
for their Warfare and this is because in
every animal species a group of
individuals can group together and wage
war against another group and take
resources from the other group and this
would be
beneficial but such Warfare is extremely
rare in other animals and this is
because Warfare is a form of cooperation
individuals have to risk their personal
fitness in order to benefit the group
and natural selection typically doesn't
favor this kind of
behavior what the turana Warfare tell us
is that human Warfare is an evolutionary
novel phenomenon
even in the absence of the Leviathan as
is the case in the
turana uh humans are able to put
together really large war parties the
Trana put together war parties of a
thousand Warriors and 99% of these
Warriors are not genetically related to
each other that means the genes in a
particular Warrior has have nothing to
gain from the success of another Warrior
on the
battlefield yet the Tana are taking
tremendous risks in Warfare 40% of the
adult men have suffered bullet injuries
and one out of five of the male children
who are born are going to die in
Warfare so how did the turana manage
this costly form of
cooperation they do this through moral
sentiments they do this through a moral
psychology that has evolved in humans
that makes us feel moral punitive
sentiments towards those who harm
members of our group so for example
cowards laggards and deserters on turana
raids face these moral punitive
sentiments they face the moral Wrath of
their community members and this is what
makes them risk their lives in
combat and interestingly the scale of
this moral psychology is such that it
extends up to the cultural group
boundary up to the tri uh cultural tribe
so for instance the turana think that
it's a great thing to go to another
tribe and raid their cattle but they
think it's extremely wrong for warriors
to go and raid another turana territory
even if that territory is hundreds of
miles away and inhabited by Tana that
they may never see again and have never
seen
before so and this this particular scale
of the moral psychology has a profound
impact on how the turana live and die so
um most adult Tana men walk around with
firearms and there are plenty of
opportunities for disputes to arise
between these men yet only 1% of adult
male mortality in turana is due to one
Trana killing the other another Trana
and 50% is due to intertribal
Warfare so I want to conclude by saying
that the cows are not the answer to uh
Trana Warfare just as resources do not
provide an adequate or satisfactory
explanation for the prevalence of
warfare in other animal species so to
understand the origins and scale of
violence we need to understand the
origins and scale of human
cooperation and in humans this
cooperation evolved to be supported by a
moral psychology that extends to include
members of our cultural tribe even if
they comprise a million people or more
and it comes at the expense of our
self-interest and unfortunately it also
comes at the expense of people who live
beyond this cultural
boundary uh I I wanted to interrupt for
a second the flow to remind you that uh
we're actually going to do things
slightly differently tonight from your
point of view you have a different
homework assignment than normal uh I
hope that what you've heard already has
begun to provoke your
questioning and because of the nature of
the two panels I want you to start
thinking about your questions and write
them down when we're finished up here in
real time we'll stay up here we're going
to ask you to have your questions pass
down while we're on stage and we're
going to spend three or four minutes
going through them and then answer your
questions so think of questions while
the speakers are are are are are talking
and feel free to write them down and
also by the way I was told you were told
not to tweet but feel free to tweet
okay
good anyone who is interested in uh
understanding violence from a biological
perspective is often accused of implying
that humans are saddled with a violent
brain or genes for aggression and that
this is a fatalistic View and therefore
something that we must hope and pray is
not true let us uh hope that violence is
just a uh a cultural Construction uh
let's hope that it's just a uh a
practice like driving on the right or
driving on the left that we could uh
change if we wanted to but um I've
always uh thought that this is just a
bad way to construct the uh
understanding of the biology of violence
that I think there is some reason to
believe and we've heard some evidence
from uh from Richard and Sarah that we
that humans left to their own devices uh
do have impulses that can result in Acts
of aggression on the other hand the
human brain is a complicated system and
that even if it does Harbor uh urges for
violence that's not all it Harbors there
is an old cartoon image uh that of a
devil on one shoulder and an angel on
another and uh a person always veering
between the impulses toward violence and
and inhibitions against us uh there may
be some evidence from the study of the
brain that that cartoon wasn't
completely off the mark and that leads
us to our third speaker Adrien rain
Richard Perry University professor of
criminology and Psychiatry at the
University of Pennsylvania and author of
anatomy of violence the biological roots
of crime uh Adrien uh does among other
things scans of brain activity in uh
criminals and uh and other people I
think his is the first paper in
Neuroscience that I've ever read where
it says control group non- murderers
so Adrian what uh has your research
shown about the different areas uh of
the brain that both impel us toward and
inhibit us from violence yes you know
the the origins of violence and here in
my work and the work of other people
it's you know we're not saying that you
know everyone as you say is propelled
towards violence for a biological reason
but not all of us are violent and so the
question that I've been looking at is
you know what discriminates or what
difference is there between somebody who
will take aive from somebody who's
relatively normal so what you see here
is the results of a brain Imaging study
where we brain scan 41 murderers and
compared them to 41 normal controls so
if you look at this um you've got you're
looking down on the brain here oh don't
want to look down on me too much if you
put the that's there we go uh you
looking down on the brain here and this
is uh an example of a normal individual
this is the front of the brain the back
and the red colors and yellow indicate
high glucose metabolism or high brain
functioning but what we found in our
group of 41 murderers is that there was
a distinct lack of activity in the
prefrontal cortex so the question yes
the origin the cause I mean why is it
that if you lack that AC ity in the
prefrontal cortex why do you have a poor
functioning prefrontal cortex why are
you more likely to kill will you go back
to what the prefrontal cortex does and
amongst other things it's involved in
checking our impulsive behavior it's
involved in regulating our emotional
feelings so we all get angry at times
don't we what stops us from lashing out
it's that guardian angel on behavior
that Steven was mentioning it's the
prefrontal cortex who which is keeping a
lid on our runaway emotions but if that
angel is asleep if the prefrontal cortex
is not working too well then the devil
can come out and people can get killed
now that's only one piece of a much
bigger jigsa puzzle when we get to the
brain basis to violence you've been
hearing about the moral psychology and
there's a brain area called the amydala
which generates in part that sense of
moral feeling of what's right and wrong
and what we've been finding in a way is
that Psychopathic individuals those who
lack conscience lack remorse lack guilt
they have a shrunken amydala and we know
that the amydala is very important for
giving us in part that sense of what is
right and wrong so one of those
intriguing questions I have is if these
murderers and psychopaths are not
responsible for poor brain functioning
well whether it's in the emotional
amydala or the guardian angel in the
prefrontal cortex here then one question
is how moral is it of us to punish these
offenders as harshly as we do um I was
involved in a defense of a man who
brutally raped and murdered a woman in
Denver Colorado I had him brain scanned
and this is again you're looking down on
the brain this is a group of normal
controls showing good activation in the
prefrontal cortex but this is the scan
of the murderer here who raped and
murdered this young woman and you see a
distinct lack of activation in the
prefrontal cortex I argued that it was a
constellation of this neurobiological
risk factor combined with a really
Dreadful home environment that conspired
to propel this individual to be more
likely to be criminal and violent the
three judge panel bought the biosocial
argument that this social and biological
conspiracy constrained this individual's
freedom of Will and he was spared the
death penalty but I think one of the big
questions in my mind is is that the
right way to go I'm sort of a Jackel and
HD the Dr Jackal inside of me says let's
get to the origins of violence let's
understand it and with understanding
comes m
but the Mr hide inside of me says buy
into that argument and you know where
goes Justice where goes responsibility
is that just going to be a brain excuse
to let violent offenders off the hook is
that just a slippery slope down to
Armageddon and a lawless Society so
that's just one of those questions that
I'm really torn with and then what are
we going to do about it how are we going
to change the brain to change violent
criminal
Behavior that's a deep question you know
but this is going to sound fishy but
fish oil given to prisoners in two
randomized control trials has been shown
to reduce serious offending in the
prison by around
34% fish hold contains omega-3 which is
critical for brain structure and
function so you know it sound you know
nobody likes to hear eat more food fish
fish for felons you know uh come on um
but it sounds laughable and there's no
simple solution to the causes of to
Crime but could that be one of the
components and what would be so wrong
about giving better nutrition not just
to felons but what about the next
generation of young kids who maybe
through having social risk factors and
biological risk factors needs early
intervention and prevention against
future crime so big questions you know
if there is a brain basis to violence
what does this mean about punishment
what does it mean to us about preventing
how are we going to change the brain to
reduce violent behavior and these are
just two of the thorny questions which
amongst other things Dr Jackal and Mr
Hyde inside of me wrestles with from
dayto day thank you Adrien the
fact that the brain has multiple centers
that can uh ramp up or clamp down on
violence opens up a number of ways in
which the actual incidence of violent
Behavior could be changed and we can we
know that we can change the brain not
just by feeding it fish oil but because
areas of the brain are connected to the
eyes and ears and we live in a social
environment uh that allows the brain to
process information about the uh norms
and expectations and value of other
people and that's another route by which
the uh we can change the brain my
invocation of uh the Angel and the devil
was a little bit self- serving because
uh I have written a book called The
Better angels of our nature a expression
taken from Abraham Lincoln's first
inaugural address to reinforce the idea
that the brain has and Human Nature has
multiple components some of which Adrien
literally displayed on on that slide uh
opening up the possibility that changes
in our society can uh alter the uh
Temptations and uh inhibitions to
violence that brings us to our uh fourth
speaker Erica chenowith who is associate
professor at the Joseph Corbell School
of International Studies at the
University of Denver and the co-author
of why civil resistance works the
Strategic logic of nonviolent conflict a
book that I can I can fairly say has
elect ified the field of political
science it has already won several
prizes because of its uh surprising
conclusion which cha challenges a
certain conventional
wisdom now most educated people know
that sometimes civil resistance Works
can we have the slide
please that
uh not that one that
one that there have been conspicuous
episodes in recent history in which the
uh Power of nonviolent resistance has
changed societies but most educated
people will tell you well of course that
works in civilized parts of the world
like uh uh Britain and its former
colonies like the United States but it's
naive and romantic and idealistic to
think that civil resistance can be a
force for political change uh worldwide
uh Erica can you tell us why you uh what
your resarch has shown about that
conventional wisdom and why it should be
true that you obtained the surprising
results you did sure and I should start
by saying that I was one of those people
at the outset of this study who thought
that advancing the notion that civil
resistance could work was naive
idealistic and perhaps even dangerous uh
but um in my own experience uh I want to
First just say what I mean when I say
civil resistance civil resistance is a
method of conflict not necessarily anide
ideology about conflict but it's a
method of conflict in which unarmed
civilians use a variety of coordinated
tactics like strikes protests boycotts
and other methods of action without
directly harming or even threatening to
physically harm their opponent and um I
was first introduced to this topic a
number of years ago when I attended a
workshop where a lot of the people there
uh were making the claim that civil
resistance could be in some sense a
functional equivalent to Armed struggle
that is that it could be as effective or
even more effective than waging armed
struggle uh to achieve major political
outcomes like removing an incumbent
leader from Power even a dictator or
creating an independent territory uh so
I was provoked and bothered by this
claim which I thought didn't have very
much empirical support and uh over the
next couple of years a colleague Maria
Stefan and I collected data on all known
uh major violent and violent campaigns
from 1900 to 2006 and we looked at uh
campaigns where there were at least a
thousand observed participants meaning
they were already fairly mature uh in
terms of their size and we looked at
these popular movements that were trying
to either remove an incumbent government
or create an independent territory now
the reason we chose those two types of
outcomes was because precisely of my
skepticism uh because I thought that
maybe nonviolent resistance could work
if you're trying to establish um you
know greater rights you're trying to
expand your rights establish labor
rights and things like this but it
probably couldn't work if you're up
against very powerful authoritarian
regimes for
example so uh the ultimate outcome of
this data collection yielded uh well
over 300 uh nonviolent and violent
campaigns for those types of outcomes
and the the shocking finding is this
that from 1900 to 2006 uh non-violent
campaigns were more than twice as
effective as violent insurgencies in
achieving their aims and that uh in
especially the last 40 years this trend
has actually increased over time such
that nonviolent campaigns are becoming
increasingly effective and quite a lot
more frequent whereas violent
insurgencies are becoming increasingly
rare and increasingly unsuccessful that
is they're going out of style and in a
major way uh so the reason for this uh
we think is because of people power
itself what we found when we drilled
into these cases was that the nonviolent
campaigns were on average four times
larger than the average violent campaign
and if you looked at them as a
proportion of the overall population
they were something like 11 times larger
and they feature a much more inclusive
Civic spirit so that way more people are
involved that means women children uh
the elderly population people with
disabilities are able to become inv
involved in things like
non-cooperation uh which can involve
much lower risk to physical repression
uh and it allows many more people to to
uh be activated now the reason Size
Matters is because once very large
proportions of the population are
involved uh they start to change the the
risk calculations and the interests of
say the security forces who might be
willing to shoot at a single person
standing in a square but when they look
out over a sea of 100,000 people and by
the way recognize their neighbors or
children uh they might just pretend they
didn't hear the order to shoot and once
the security forces or economic Elites
or business Elites or civilian
bureaucrats withdraw their cooperation
from the regime opponent it's only a
matter of time until these movements
succeed the last thing I want to mention
about this is that we've also found that
the way that uh these movements carry
themselves out the way they fight
really affects what these societies have
looked like in the longer term so
societies that are emerging from a civil
resistance campaign even a failed one
are far more likely to emerge uh with
Democratic institutions within the next
5 to 10 years than campaigns where
violent resistance was waged and they're
also about 15% less likely to experience
a relapse into Civil War uh within the
next decade so we would never argue that
civil resistance always works um but it
certainly works a lot more uh than its
detractors would have you believe uh and
it certainly works a lot better uh than
its violent Alternatives both in terms
of the short and longer
term thank you a remarkable story
which
uh yes and com combined with uh some of
the other speakers at the weekend
conference who showed that uh contrary
to another bit of conventional wisdom uh
terrorism doesn't work the failure rate
of terrorist movements is spectacular
the their success rate is 3% at most and
that may be an exaggeration if some of
these results were printed on postcards
and dropped from uh airplanes and
balloons all over the world uh it could
change history because it is often
believed that violence is deplorable
awful evil but we have no choice without
a little violence you don't get what you
want and uh that just may be factually
incorrect uh in the better angels of our
nature I began by saying this may be the
most peaceful era in our species
existence knowing that this is a highly
counterintuitive claim I was emboldened
to make it because I had a number of
Scholars of crime and War uh who had my
back and uh among them is our last
Speaker John Mueller the Woody Hayes
professor of National Security studies
at the meran Center of Ohio State
University and the author of many books
including overblown how politicians in
the terrorism industry inflate National
Security threats and why we believe them
and uh Retreat from Doomsday the
obsolescence of major war uh John
predicted the end of the Cold War before
it happened uh it said that most
political scientists can't even predict
events after they've happened
John's colleagues thought he was Stark
rving mad when he made this prediction
and history has shown that in this and
in many other regards he has uh proven
to be correct I first became acquainted
with John when he sent me a paper whose
title was war has almost ceased to exist
my question is John can you explain what
you meant by that title uh what is the
evidence behind that uh rather startling
and counterintuitive claim and how did
it happen well it's a very interesting
process um uh the title of the Symposium
is transcending our Origins and I
actually wasn't there at the origins but
uh at this Workshop we've got several
people e either were at the origins or
act like they were uh and what they what
they tell me is that Warfare was their
right at the beginning and we may be uh
at a position which at least somewhat
form
Warfare is becoming obsolete uh by far
the most important um statistic it seems
to me in the history of warfare is zero
or near zero which is the number of wars
that have taken place uh since 1945
between uh developed countries major
countries I call it major
war um this is really an amazing
development uh it's centered of course
on the developed World which itself is
centered basically on Europe and Europe
used to be one of the most warlike it
used to be the most warlike continent in
the world and it's now slumped into this
long period of basic peace uh it's a
couple of countries there fairly well
known are France and Germany um and uh
both of them are filled with extremely
clever people who are extremely good
over several hundred years of getting
into Wars with each other it is really
brilliant achievement in some respects
they've now slumped into peace uh
overall to the point where
um it isn't even something that's
considered I've used I've used the
phrase uh sort of rationally Unthinkable
and subrational
Unthinkable um
oh uh am I coming through
now uh uh rationally Unthinkable and
subrational
Unthinkable uh uh something is
rationally Unthinkable means you you
think about it and decide well the costs
really outweigh the benefits so I'm not
going to do it subrational uh thinkable
means you don't even think about it it
doesn't even consider consider you don't
even consider for example in the case of
dueling which was once very common you
still have young men of the same Testo
testosterone level and so forth they
still get into arguments but it never
occurs to them to to uh challenge the
other guy to a duel uh you could have
legal duel like with boxing clubs but it
doesn't really even come up and war
between France and Germany seems to fit
in fit into that um if you uh one uh uh
uh Economist has calculated how far back
in history do you have to go before you
find an equal period in which the Ry
river which separates Germany and France
remained uncrossed by armies with
hostile intent and you have to go back
more than 2,000 years before you find
out um Europe was a rather different
place in those days um so we've had this
is really a major achievement uh after
World War II there's lots of predictions
that there would be world War 3 would be
happening in another 20 years or so uh
and it obviously hasn't happened in
addition now um over particularly over
the last 20 years or 30 years there's
been a considerable uh decline in the
number of international Wars as usually
defined in fact since the end of the
Cold War 1989 to the present date
there's really only been one war of sort
of the old-fashioned Variety in which
two countries go at it over a a
condition like for example of uh a
border dispute and that is between erria
and Ethiopia between 1998 and uh uh
2000 so uh even those Wars there they
still exist but are are really quite
infrequent and there hadn't been that
many of them uh for the last since
really since the 70s in many respect uh
finally the Third Kind Of War uh is
Civil War and there have been a lot of
those um however since since the 1990s
since the early 1990s where they sort of
reached a peak when there's something
like 30 of them 20 to 30 of them going
on there's been a gradual decline uh to
the point where there's maybe four or
five at any one time obvious said four
or five too many uh but it really isn't
a remarkably low level uh more and
moreover that relatively low level has
persisted throughout this entire Century
it doesn't seem to be just a blip that
we're going to bounce off of and go back
up so the the news generally is is
pretty comforting in that area um uh war
is not obsolete it's still we still know
how to do it uh we obviously don't have
a world government that can keep it from
happening again uh but it has uh slumped
uh very substantially into uh a period
of substantial
disuse great thank you well the theme
was uh transcending human Origins and
we've gone from uh our chimpanzee
ancestors through tribal Warfare to the
brain and to some Modern developments
that are showing that we can we can
transcend some aspects of our Origins
thanks to our own uh Ingenuity and our
own ability to uh hold out violence no
longer as a contest to be won but rather
as a a problem to be solved uh that is
itself is a gift of the human capacity
for uh cognition for uh understanding uh
for treating problems based on our
understanding and which I think think is
uh one of the fruits that we can
continue to expect from a a scientific
understanding of the uh Origins and
control of violence thank well thank you
Stephen uh and thank the panel for for
for provocative and counterintuitive
arguments which have the virtue of uh
being empirically correct apparently
um uh and what I'd like to do now is
while you're writing down questions I
have one or two questions to give you a
chance to write down and then and then
as I say we'll take a break and and uh a
short break we'll be R here and then
we'll answer your questions there's I
think two I'll ask uh given the time I
we began a little bit late Erica I I
want to ask you a question because uh in
the meeting you said uh gave us
statistic that I found very striking
which is that movements that had
3.5% of the population or more were 100%
effective in making change okay but it
may caused me to think about the issue
of given especially in in the first
world the the um growth of mass media
and the and in some sense the control of
mass media by a smaller and smaller
group of people does that mean that it's
more likely that you'll be able to that
the that people who want to buy um by
change will be able to do
that I don't think so I'm a little more
optimistic and part of the reason is
because civil resistance is costly
action uh so it's we're not talking
about people who decide that they'll go
to their computer and click on a button
and say yes I support this uh particular
activity or this activism um we're
talking about people you know chaining
themselves to to hardware and things
like that um and taking real risks so
the the the move from being complacent
uh to being willing to do something to
actually going out and Prosecuting a
conflict using high-risk Civil
Disobedience I think is a major leap for
many people which is why these campaigns
though frequent are by no means the rule
in terms of human activity um I think
that that means that even though the
threshold for participation seems to be
about 3.5% of the population tipping
them over into success uh it still means
that that would constitute 11 some
million people in the United States and
I I just don't see that many people uh
doing real Civil Disobedience unless it
was a pretty serious issue well that
gives me hope that the Tea Party won't
won't anyway um but uh
there's another comment and John I want
to ask ask you because I'm I'm
contractually obliged to ask this
question so Star Trek um
uh imagines a future where where in some
sense war is over that some in some
sense Humanity has that's a phase do you
think that's a since we're going to go
to the Future after the break do you
think that's a possible future yeah I
think it's it's perfectly plausible um
obviously you've had this this
remarkable change in Europe and the
developed World which has lasted you
know it can't be a fluke it's lasted an
extremely long time and the decline of
civil war is also uh uh really
interesting essentially the pattern is
um uh Wars is an idea you don't have to
do it and the parallel I would draw is
with slavery uh it was about is about at
the end of the 18th century a bunch of
people start jumping up and down and
saying let's not do slavery anymore and
they're T thought to be totally crazy
within a 100 years slavery one of the
master institutions of the human race uh
what it was eradicated basically
substantially certainly from what was
then known as Christendom uh the uh the
developed world and uh something could
similar similar could be happening to to
uh to war about the the the idea that
war is a really bad idea goes back a
long way but the idea that War uh an
organized movement to stop war is really
quite recent about 140 years about 1889
it started
uh and it may be follow and they also
talked about we got rid of slavery now
we can get rid of war and I think
substantially that's done uh it is not
that people can't do War but they are
just don't want to do it anymore than
they want to duel it just doesn't enter
their calculations so I think the
trajectory looks pretty good uh I
obviously wouldn't say it's certain by
any means but but slavery hasn't come
back I mean there's forms of it and so
forth but formal slavery can go to New
Orleans and buy somebody um just you
know is just inconceivable essentially
so that that's been gone a long time
great okay with that hopeful view we'll
see if you buy that um and so if you
could um bring down the questions if you
have them um well and I think we put on
some music so you'll have something to
entertain you and um and we'll sit up
here and in uh in four or five minutes
we'll begin with uh we we'll we'll spend
about 15 minutes answer your questions
before an
intermission e
浏览更多相关视频
Mary Evelyn Tucker 0101 - To See The Universe Not Just As A Place, But As A Story
The surprising decline in violence | Steven Pinker
Baby 'Teacher' Helps Develop Empathy in Schoolchildren
【タロサックが解決】英語継続マスタープラン/症状別モチベーションを保つ方法/外敵を制する方法【ENGLISH SKILL SET】
The Great Debate: ORIGINS OF VIOLENCE (OFFICIAL) - (Part 2/2)
Adam Silver Explains Michael Jordan's Viral #NBA75 Entrance At All-Star Weekend | KG CERTIFIED
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)