Fromms Aggression Essays - Dispute Resolution, Ethics, Crime

2.Fromm claims that humans do more defensive (benign) aggression than other animals do. Under this thinking Fromm broke defensive aggression down into three separate categories. One, accidental, example would be someone hurting another without the intention to doing so. Second, is playful, this is when the use of skill or sport would be displayed. Aggression may come out in competitiveness. Third, is self-assertive which focused on moving toward a goal with no doubt and little fear. The link between male hormones and how it affects the levels of violence is sited. Fromm does evaluate humans and animals and the common interests we share in protecting certain environmental conditions. Fromm also claims that humans use violence in ways that other animals do not. ?Only man seems to take pleasure in destroying life without any reason or purpose other than that of destroying? (E.Fromm, p.211). Malignant aggression is driven with an intention to hurt even though no threat is present. We are driven to adapt to our vast multiple environments and challenges that we are confronted with. The main feature that human possesses over animals is the ability of imagination. We not only react to the actual reality that is present in front of us but prepare for all possibility of what might happen in the future. We apply reason to our thought process and at times we attempt to exercise our limitations. In closing, Fromm divided aggression into either benign or malignant violence. Either having the intent to harm or not. The diversity between man and animals is the characteristics that include imagination, reason, and self-awareness. In my viewpoint, we will continue to adapt to our conditions. Conditions will continue to change. We will apply reason behind our actions to justify our behavior. We try to better connect to nature but our greatest battle is with each other. 3.Fromm claims that cultures actually get more violent as they become more civilized. Fromm?s view point of human kind is historically based on archaeology, anthropology, psychology of violence and the development of social issues. ?Most primitive societies were not capable of war because war requires a sophisticated level of conceptualization. Most primitive societies could not imagine an organization necessary to conquer or defeat a neighbor.? (E.Fromm, p. 173.) The idea was that primitive people had no need for violence. Early societies did not have an impulse to fight. Early culture worked on a principle on survival and cooperation. Based on archaeology the evidence reflected back to a society that existed for over eight hundred years with the nonexistence of violence so therefore they lived in peace. There was verification that the family and social life centered on a mother-goddess. This was a culture based on a equilateral society that each member was important and had a purpose. Members supported each other and the center of life was the mother-nature. Primitive people soon changed and agricultural soon made social progress and development. The agricultural revolution brought with it a change in a standard in living and in higher cognitive thought process. The introduction of surplus and division of labor resulted in the discovery of free will and control. There was a sudden shift in the understanding that humans were now in control of the world and the focus was no longer on the dependency of mother earth. Civilization is seen as progress and progress is viewed as a changed in our living conditions. Human violence is our response to social conditions or our disapproval to those conditions. Modern cultures of today believe they have reason to use violence and justify cruelty in order to deliberately apply it so that their goal can be achieved.