Violence is learned

 

Canción sin medo

A few days ago, in conversation with an animal behaviorist (I believe there are only two in the country), he told me, and rightly so, that animals, dogs in this case, are the product of their environment, and that the influence of their genetics (parents, grandparents and other family tree) only accounts for 9% of the result of their innate behaviors. In humans, its value should be analyzed according to the behaviors in question, since what was assumed and all the studies resulting from these assumptions were based on 50% "inherited genetic" behaviors, therefore innate, and the remaining 50% arranged in the environment, in the subject's environments and in their way of understanding the world. Today this proportion has decreased to 40%. Today we know that racism, xenophobia, hatred and taboos are learned; just as physiological needs for food, sleep, etc. are innate, along with family rituals and beliefs that are passed down from generation to generation, some of which can be said to already populate the territory between the innate and the acquired. Society (parents, educators, communities, peer groups, relatives, universities, etc.) is a major modulator of this 60% of the acquired, which leads us to the currently unfavorable and understandable results of increasing violence, uneven peace and extreme differences in opportunities that the subject suffers and makes others suffer in the present reality. The behaviorist in question argues that animals, more than their genetics, suffer from the limitations and amplitudes that the environment offers them, favoring or, in the case of animal aggression, disfavoring their healthy development. The environment is often unfavorable to them. I agree. As long as the human mindset looks at animals by their breeds and lops, and in this case, considers their education important, or, on the other hand, by the biased way in which it looks at domesticated animals and objects, which allows them to enjoy care, without considering the living being behind the object, we objectify animals, which, in my opinion, perfectly matches the reality obtained. Exacerbated materialism and violence exponentially reach the confrontational limits between the health and the disease of the environment.
We also do not have infrastructures prepared for the treatment of animals due to a lack of resources. Kennels cannot help due to a lack of resources. Municipalities prioritize other areas and not this one due to a lack of resources. The country invests in weapons, airports and banks, but there are no resources to remove the underprivileged and socially marginalized from their ambivalent conditions. When resources combined with a lack of will and reflection come together, we have the recipe for a perfect storm, to regret not having changed the quotient of this equation of violence that is left over for us and for those who are yet to come. The locks on the door will be late, but it is all the same. Elementary and regrettable, dear Watsons.
I have met several animal friends, including myself, by looking at them and being able to create emotional bonds, by understanding that they are not objects, but living beings that have come to evolve, moreover, like us humans, who tend to dehumanize our fellow beings, especially living beings, be they animals, plants or minerals. Respect for the nature of everyone around us is very important for the development and evolution of mentalities that insist on persisting in old dogmas and obsolete paradigms. If you have an animal on a leash 24 hours a day, rain or shine, feeding it whenever and however you want, to the point where the animal itself begs for food and affection, I will certainly have two possibilities, which in my opinion, can be narrowed down to one: An animal rejected and treated in this way will look at its "owner", obeying him as long as it has to, but if freed, it will turn against him or, ultimately, run away from the mistreatment as far as it can. And a third hypothesis arises, common to men and animals (Plato's allegory of the cave) which is not knowing what to do with one's freedom, because one is unaware that there will be other realities. Because animals, in general, do not have the consciousness that humans have. Here, both the animal and the human must be safeguarded, because if there is the assumption that animals have no conscience or reason to assist them, since their animal instincts can win in their nature, there are, on the other hand, unconscious humans capable of the most vandalistic acts against others, devoid of any remorse or regret. Of course, this is a superficial view of reality and society does not invest resources to recover or treat, if you prefer, either the animals or the subjects who display such violent behavior. Hospitalization, incarceration and death are seen as possible shortcuts, for some and for others. Remember that Victor Hugo, who wrote Les Misérables, congratulated us, the Portuguese nation, for the feat of eliminating the death penalty, as history confirms, on July 10, 1867. History does not contemplate the continuity of the reflective exercise, for that we have other departments. The biggest. The human. That of conscience.
I remember a conversation with Tomás who, at the time, was afraid that in our dog, Kirie, they would win, not her 9% of genetics, but the remaining x+y+z% of the environment that is adverse to her. As an example, he gave this: Mom, when the mentally ill people we see in hospitals commit revolting acts, what do we do with them? Killing is not the solution. Locking them in a cell is not a solution. Violence has never been a solution for anything, except for increasing it. We need to work with humans and animals and find them appropriate treatment. When a conscious and non-mentally ill man commits a crime, should we kill him? He is arrested and serves his prison time, where he learns, not to unlearn the behavior he had, but more elaborate ways of continuing to practice it, without getting caught. Even in this situation, the penalty cannot be death. Because there are treatments available to achieve other results, where the subject can repair the mistakes made and recognize that they committed them improperly. Death cannot be a solution, not even euthanasia. Euthanasia is for people and animals who are suffering from illness, in horrible pain and cannot get through the rest of their lives, feeling miserable and calling their pain life sentences. It is a simplistic, yet comprehensive view of how much we still need to change to reach the levels of evolutionary humanization. Here, when animals walk through the streets, instead of petting them, they show them a stick, a hoe, a hoe, scaring them away and even attacking them. We know that violence begets violence. It will never be different in any other world, in any other reality. We have to pay attention to the choices we make and defend to change the quotient of negative behavioral outcomes. In war, dividend and divisor both fight to defend by attacking the favorable quotient. Violence is made up of war, conflicts, lack of cordiality and lack of reflection on the general interest of the majority. In war, peace is not considered, but rather a win-lose victory. And this is the generalized picture that we have, as a sample of other groups, in which the statistical numbers are far from giving voice or platform to consensus.

In a society that is hostile to others, that cooperates with vandalism and the violation of human rights and others, the results obtained favor the 9% animal genetics and the 40% human genetics, and I do not believe that the results are favorable for any evolutionary context. After all, the innate material should only be reused in questions of an ethical nature and human values. The rest is of no use to us in the here and now. Except for education and training. Except for those who study and reflect on human, animal and natural behavior, be they historians, psychologists, psychiatrists, sociologists, anthropologists or philosophers. This topic should be an exercise in continuous scrutiny for any society. Society in general does not agree on these issues and, through policies in any field, they indicate to us that these scholars, who consider themselves agents of change, consist of minorities, and therefore, are important only for those who defend the same causes and demand the same reflections. It is necessary to establish goals and deadlines to change all these situations that, isolated or together with other existing variables, condition us and make us resort to the ever-present excuse of lack of resources, of listening without hearing, of listening to counter-argue, without links for dialogue and the achievement of positive objectives for the globalization of well-being.

Positive conditioning and reinforcement serve as tools to unlearn negative behaviors and learn healthy ones, and serve as promoters of consensus and improvements in the condition of those who need them. Education is important for everyone, since we inhabit the same planet and we have seen ourselves favored or harmed by the general results achieved. If we remain in the outdated and anachronistic beliefs of the old, which served in a historical time included in the past, which was made of setbacks and progress, but which obeyed specific and circumscribed circumstances within it, we incur the constant and dystopian error of not evolving to our best human and animal potential. And today, April 6, 2025, today, the month of carnations and freedom, fraternity and equality, we continue to see, more and more, the setbacks in which we find ourselves trapped due to the lack of consensual majorities in urgent debates for the democratic construction of a more equal, healthier society that can adapt to all the challenges that lie ahead. We are still in the infancy of human consciousness. And this is sad and it is not April and therefore the fruits that will come, after the flowers, may be bitter, especially for those who are fighting for survival and for all those we claim to love and protect. I always end as I began. In a desire for a different April, and in a realization of civilizational backwardness that leaves bitterness and frustration in plain sight.