On Aggression is a classic in the ethology literature, first published in 1963, and when I picked it up off the shelf of a second-hand bookstore I was mostly looking for the scientific romance that characterised science literature back then. I did not expect it's central message to be so strong after all these years - a testament to both the strength of the science, and the humility Lorenz shows when going 'beyond the science of the day' - nor did I expect it to be so painfully topical. I began reading this before the pandemic of police brutality that has come to characterise the may/june protests in america really began take up my (an Australian) day-to-day attentions, but in the final chapter of the book Lorenz discusses what animals have taught us about aggression and how we can use that knowledge to try surmount our own sociopolitical aggression - using race relations in America as a case study. I could not think of a more moving coincidence. A gain of salt should be taken with this book - after all, it is a scientific book 60 years out of date and is not immune to cultural baggage of the time - but it should be read by every activist, political scientist, diplomat, military & police officer, psychologist, ethologist, and behaving human out there (Just perhaps read Behave by Robert Sapolsky first).
But I am getting ahead of myself - the majority of the book is about an ethological approach to studying aggression; that is, looking at aggression in animal behaviour and trying to understand it. More broadly than understanding the mechanics of aggression, Lorenz asks the teleological and evolutionary questions about aggression - why does aggression exist? What survival-value does it provide? In the behavioural sciences, 'aggression' is a slightly more narrow concept than it is in general use. Aggression refers to 'aggressive' acts between members of the same, or closely related, species and precludes behaviours that function as predation or play. There are a number of answers to this question - the obvious ones presented in biology 101 - defending territories for food and/or reproductive access, but aggression runs far deeper than that.
Some have suggested that On Aggression deals a lot with tangential topics, but I think this criticism is missing the point. Lorenz wants to claim Aggression is only one part of an animals behavioural repertoire, and must be understood within the context of everything else that animal does, and that is why the book can sometimes seem to veer off topic. The great majority of the book actually concerns social formation in animals and comparisons across species, from the 'anonymous flock' to deep, life-long friendships. The book could accurately be titled, instead, 'On Friendship' - probably attracting a very different audience than 'On Aggression,' but it is Lorenz' view that the two are intimately tied, and co-evolved as two opposing but necessary behavioural drives, analogous to the autonomic and parasympathetic response that either prepares us for action ('fight or flight) or calms the body down to save metabolic energy ('Rest and Digest'). Social bonding may have originally evolved in predatory species (It is well known now, and speculated at in the 60's, that social bonding evolved numerous times) as a way to inhibit aggression. For animals with 'natural weapons,' such as a wolf, there must be an intrinsic inhibitor of conspecific aggression else the species would commit a kind of murder-suicide because it is simply too easy for one member of the species to kill another. Even in non-social predatory species - the Tiger is a good example - multiple members of the species can only meet safely when there is another powerful behavioural drive (Usually Sexual or Maternal) strong enough to overcome the intrinsic aggressive drive. It is noteworthy that a Female Tiger (in most cases) will attack and kill her own offspring once they have grown up enough to be unable to trigger a maternal response. In contrast, for a species where is it more difficult for one member to kill another - traditional prey species - such an inhibitory drive is less required as it is comparatively easier for a fight to break down before death occurs, or killing requires more effort and is, thus, a rarer occurrence. As such, these species have less need for inhibition of aggression. Lorenz reviews the understanding of agression and it's evolutionary history in his time - beginning in coloured reef fish - and social bonding/group formation - with particular attention to the goose.
The writing here is superb. Lorenz manages to give detailed accounts without getting bogged in biological minutiae, and brings genuine humour throughout the book. It is a fine blend of scientific results and personal anecdotes told in tandem and in support, to satisfy both the sceptic in the reader who desires accuracy and the curiosity in the reader, who wants to be entertained. Lorenz is well aware that, though accuracy is important, it is entertainment that will drive the reader to understand. The book is very well structured, beginning with a slow wade into the reef of coloured fish where new concepts and ideas are gradually introduced, bit by bit, such that it never feels overwhelming. This is the greatest strength of the book, and i found that before i realised it i was intellectually wrestling with some pretty hefty themes, but Lorenz is a good guide. Having finished his survey of the animal ethology literature Lorenz turns to the 'most complex animal species', man.
Here is where On Aggression really becomes an interesting read. As a book on it's topic it is interesting enough. As a modern reader, however, reading about the topic of human aggression in society and politics written during the beginning of the Cold War and just after World War Two, it's a fascinating window into a chaotic time. In this respect, On Aggression is as useful to historians of the middle 20th century as it is to the animal lover. The biggest concern here is that our species is, phylogenetically, a prey species. The technological ascendancy of man is cultural and in evolutionary terms very, very new. We are therefore in the unfortunate position of having a Wolf's Jaw without the behavioural inhibitions of not using it against ourselves. We have the socio-cognitive development of a prey species with the (technologically augmented) body of a predatory one, and for a Lorenz looking back at the first and second world wars and staring into the possibility of nuclear holocaust - a legitimate fear in the 1960's - a bet on the long-term survival of H. sapiens is not a good gamble. He is worried that even if we do not 'irradiate ourselves with the bomb,' we are just as likely to 'do a similar thing with Carbon.' I wish I could give him better news from the future.
But Lorenz wants to offer some solutions, for through we don't have the inhibitions of a predatory social species bred into us by millennia of evolution, we do have the advantage of abstract reasoning. With that, perhaps we can learn from a study of aggression in animals and use what we learn to design our own inhibitions. The greatest inhibitory drive is a bond of friendship, and so it is Lorenz's great hope that the nations and peoples of the world could overcome the aggressive, fearful drives first instilled into us as rodent-like mammals fleeing before the Tyrannosaurus by enhanced international and intercultural exchange, by turning the 'other' into just another friend. An ardent supporter of the U.N, In this hope he foretells some many of the findings in psychology and political science of the 60 years after his book, and precedes them all in his prescriptions for world peace all by looking 'backwards though evolution' to see what the animals around us have to say.
It is in the final chapter where Lorenz outlines his ideas on how to avoid human-human aggression that he uses race relations in the US as a case study - and here the book is really depressing, for 60 years on, it is very, very clear we as a global society have learned nothing from Lorenz, On Aggression, or his favourite goose Martina.