Mechanisms of suppression of aggression

Dr. Doping tells about aggression in primate mechanisms restore relations after the conflict and stress hormones. What are the views on the mechanisms of suppression of aggression in primates? How do the biological mechanisms of the restoration of relations after the conflict? Does the situation conflict stress the aggressor?

In his book "Aggression (so-called" evil ")," Konrad Lorenz addressed the problem of aggression. Man as a species is very aggressive and kill their brothers, in this case within the larger events, such as war, thousands and even millions. He explained by the fact that man is descended from animals that are used in the vast majority of plant food. In other words, it did not come from prey. According to the scientist, carnivorous animals exist innate mechanisms of inhibition of aggression, but there are no such mechanisms of herbivorous animals. My western-primatologists colleagues in the late 70's have questioned this statement, and not by chance.

To cope with stress – buy Piracetam, Phenibut, Afobazol, Selank and Phenazepam.

Biological mechanisms for the restoration of relations after the conflict only similar in monkeys and humans. After the conflict, there is an internal motivation that subconsciously pushes the former enemies to each other to be reconciled. The maximum of such psychological or physiological condition occurs after the end of the conflict, and within five minutes after him. Children tend to behave this way. If it's normal children, brought up in a society, and not in isolation, and they see his former opponent, the opponent as a member of the group, it is almost a 100% chance they will restore their relationship. There is a roster of who, how and with whom to tolerate.

We used test for the isolation of the stress hormone (cortisol) in the saliva. This non-invasive technique, no one is afraid, so we asked the children after a certain amount of time after the end of conflict, just spit in a test tube. Then asked to spit on the next day at the same time in a situation where the conflict was not, and compared the cortisol levels in a situation where there was a conflict, but the reconciliation was, and in a situation where there was a conflict, but no reconciliation was not followed (one hundred percent of reconciliation are not You can always watch). It turned out that in a situation when the conflict flared up, a fight took place, but reconciliation is not forthcoming, and the aggressor and the victim's cortisol levels were elevated compared to the background. But if there has been a reconciliation, he fell to the background level. In other words, we have been able to prove that the psychological and physiological stress tests are not the only one who was sent to the aggression, but also the aggressor.