Believing that it is our responsibility to address
from our particular disciplines the most dangerous and
destructive activities of our species, violence and
war; recognising that science is a human cultural product
which cannot be definitive or all-encompassing; and
gratefully acknowledging the support of the authorities
of Seville and representatives of Spanish UNESCO; we,
the undersigned scholars from around the world and from
relevant sciences, have met and arrived at the following
Statement on Violence. In it, we challenge a number
of alleged biological findings that have been used,
even by some in our disciplines, to justify violence
and war. Because the alleged findings have contributed
to an atmosphere of pessimism in our time, we submit
that the open, considered rejection of these mis-statements
can contribute significantly to the International Year
of Peace.
Misuse of scientific theories and data to justify violence
and war is not new but has been made since the advent
of modern science. For example, the theory of evolution
has been used to justify not only war, but also genocide,
colonialism and suppression of the weak.
We state our position in the form of five propositions.
We are aware that there are many other issues about
violence and war that could be fruitfully addressed
from the standpoint of our disciplines, but we restrict
ourselves here to what we consider a most important
first step.
It is scientifically incorrect to say that we have
inherited a tendency to make war from our animal ancestors.
Although fighting occurs widely throughout animal species,
only a few cases of destructive intra-species fighting
between organised groups have ever been reported among
naturally living species, and none of these involve
the use of tools designed to be weapons. Normal predatory
feeding upon other species cannot be equated with intra-species
violence. Warfare is a peculiarly human phenomenon and
does not occur in other animals.
The fact that warfare has changed so radically over
time indicates that it is a product of culture. Its
biological connection is primarily through language
which makes possible the coordination of groups, the
transmission of technology, and the use of tools. War
is biologically possible, but it is not inevitable,
as evidenced by its variation in occurrence and nature
over time and space. There are cultures which have not
engaged in war for centuries, and there are cultures
which have engaged in war frequently at some times and
not at others.
It is scientifically incorrect to say that war or any
other violent behaviour is genetically programmed into
our human nature. While genes are involved at all levels
of nervous system function, they provide a developmental
potential that can be actualised only in conjunction
with the ecological and social environment. While individuals
vary in their predispositions to be affected by their
experience, it is the interaction between their genetic
endowment and conditions of nurturance that determines
their personalities. Except for rare pathologies, the
genes do not produce individuals necessarily predisposed
to violence. Neither do they determine the opposite.
While genes are co-involved in establishing our behavioural
capacities, they do not by themselves specify the outcome.
It is scientifically incorrect to say that in the course
of human evolution there has been a selection for aggressive
behaviour more than for other kinds of behaviour. In
all well-studied species, status within the group is
achieved by the ability to cooperate and to fulfil social
functions relevant to the structure of that group. 'Dominance'
involves social bondings and affiliations; it is not
simply a matter of the possession and use of superior
physical power, although it does involve aggressive
behaviours. Where genetic selection for aggressive behaviour
has been artificially instituted in animals, it has
rapidly succeeded in producing hyper-aggressive individuals;
this indicates that aggression was not maximally selected
under natural conditions. When such experimentally-created
hyper-aggressive animals are present in a social group,
they either disrupt its social structure or are driven
out. Violence is neither in our evolutionary legacy
nor in our genes.
It is scientifically incorrect to say that war is caused
by 'instinct' or any single motivation. The emergence
of modern warfare has been a journey from the primacy
of emotional and motivational factors, sometimes called
'instincts', to the primacy of cognitive factors. Modern
war involves institutional use of personal characteristics
such as obedience, suggestibility, and idealism; social
skills such as language; and rational considerations
such as cost-calculation, planning, and information
processing. The technology of modern war has exaggerated
traits associated with violence both in the training
of actual combatants and in the preparation of support
for war in the general population. As a result of this
exaggeration, such traits are often mistaken to be the
causes rather than the consequences of the process.
We conclude that biology does not condemn humanity
to war, and that humanity can be freed from the bondage
of biological pessimism and empowered with confidence
to undertake the transformative tasks needed in this
International Year of Peace and in the years to come.
Although these tasks are mainly institutional and collective,
they also rest upon the consciousness of individual
participants for whom pessimism and optimism are crucial
factors. Just as 'wars begin in the minds of men', peace
also begins in our minds. The same species who invented
war is capable of inventing peace. The responsibility
lies with each of us.
Editor's Note: The Seville Statement on Violence was
drafted by an international committee of 20 scholars
at the 6th International Colloquium on Brain and Aggression
held at the University of Seville, Spain, in May 1986,
with support form the Spanish Commission for UNESCO.
The Statement's purpose is to dispel the widespread
belief that human beings are inevitably disposed to
war as a result of innate, biologically determined aggressive
traits.
UNESCO adopted the Seville Statement at its 25th General
Conference Session in Paris, October 17-November 16,
1989. The Statement has been formally endorsed by scientific
organisations and published in journals around the world.
UNESCO is preparing a brochure to be used in teaching
young people about the Statement.
In August 1987 the Council of Representatives of the
American Psychological Association voted to endorse
the Seville Statement. The Board of Scientific Affairs
emphasised that this is not a scientific statement on
the issue of specific inherited behavioural traits.
It is, rather, a social statement designed to eliminate
unfounded stereotypic thinking on the inevitability
of war.
This activity is reproduced from
Education for Development: A Teacher's Guide to Global
Learning (S. Fountain) by UNICEF. Original work available
from UNICEF Canada at www.unicef.ca
Permission to copy for educational, non-saleable use
only.
|