In case you didn't read the full sentence, I said "It applies to animals that require that aggression to hunt".
A few hundred years ago before the use of fire arms, humans were butchering other humans in the battefield.When the opponent can fight back and even kill it requires more aggression. Is that too different from predators hunting prey in the wild?
Orly? Are you sure that if thrown into the wild, you can do what our ancestors did before 3000 years of civilization?
From my earlier post_2000 to 3000 years of civilised life has not changed
everything.The word I had used was everything and not anything. I am the KFC type and quite docile.But there are others who can behave and survive like our ancestors did a few thousand years ago.
And that predation is somehow embedded into our instincts? In that case Bear Grylls' Man vs. Wild is redundant, isn't it?
In adverse conditions there have been documented cases of hungry people killing other people and cannibalizing. So, yeah when the situation arises those "embedded" instincts will come out.
Let me counter your example with another. Today's Scandinavians are among the most pacifist people on Earth, yet they are voracious meat eaters, and mostly atheist.
From earlier post_I do agree the modern trend of buying meat does'nt have the same effect that was there when people in small communities used to hunt or butcher poultry and livestock themselves.
Btw their ancestors, the Vikings, were Scandinavians.
Again, you cannot link aggressive tendencies and human behaviour with eating habits. It does not compute
.
Is Your Diet Linked To Aggressive Behavior? | LIVESTRONG.COM
Its one of those subjects that have not yet been conclusively proven.