Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
You mean killing a man by a man, obviously?�
In principle, humans, unlike animals, have a “sufficiently developed” rational and emotional mechanism to avoid killing their own kind. Thus, the intraspecific struggle is sublimated into other forms: business competition, political and career struggle, scientific discussion. Well, a fight, at the very least) �
But with a certain indoctrination aimed at suppressing healthy emotional and rational mechanisms, and appealing to archaic, animal layers of the human psyche, it is possible to encourage murder.�
These layers of the psyche will perceive murder either as a means of intraspecific struggle, or as a means of interspecific struggle-if you convince a person that he belongs to an exclusive and higher subspecies of humanity.
Examples of intraspecific advertising: “Darling, do you love me? Then kill this bastard, my husband, and we will be together forever!”, ” Brother, we must bring this bastard down, otherwise he will take over the whole market!”, ” Shoot traitors to the Motherland like mad dogs!”�
Examples of “interspecies” are no less obvious – the most obvious, of course, is the history of the Third Reich or religious extremism.
Depends on the circumstances. Some murders will be an example of intraspecific struggle. Some murders will not be an example of intraspecific struggle.
The killing of a lion by a lion is likely to be an example of intraspecific struggle. Killing a human by a human will most likely not be such an example, although it is possible to artificially construct an example when it will be.
UPD: I will expand my thesis. Intraspecific struggle is a term from biology, and a person is more complex than biological laws, he is a social being. There is no such thing as an intraspecific struggle in sociology. So what is this artificial example in which killing becomes an intraspecific struggle? This is a situation where the laws of sociology no longer apply to a person, an extreme situation, when we can no longer consider him a social animal, when he is just an animal. A desert island and you decided to eat me, and there's no one else. What a society this is. I am not a society for you, you are for me, therefore, too. And without society, we are just animals, even if we still think rationally (just as an animal thinks rationally, to the best of its abilities). And in such a situation, there is only an intraspecific struggle and someone will probably kill someone in it.
Hunting is fun.
I doubt that killing a bear or an elk is motivated by interspecific struggle.
Intraspecific causes of manslaughter or suicide are the same as negligent homicides.
If so, then murder is a broad term that applies outside of inter-and intra-species relationships.
This means that it is not applicable as a stable scientific term in biology.
It is not used, as far as I know .
Of course not. In most cases, they do not occur in order to survive or even to get any benefits. Dislike, hooliganism, or even unmotivated murders