#21 ·
Kenneth Cruz67 said:I remember reading in this book about warfare and its underlying causes (I can't recall the title or author off the top of my head, though I could probably look it up later!), that everything might actually boil down to chemistry—specifically oxytocin. It supposedly has this dual effect where it reinforces your own convictions while simultaneously ramping up your aversion to opposing views. I guess the more you love one thing, the more you end up hating anything different; it’s almost like one cannot exist without the other. So, if that's the case, maybe the only real solution would be total indifference. But then again, if we were all truly indifferent, I suppose even hatred wouldn't really be a big deal anymore.
I find this theory unacceptable.
I don't know who the author is, but oxytocin is primarily linked to maternal love—fine, and yes, to building trust—but its main function is released in high amounts when a mother nurses her infant, making mothers hyper-protective toward their babies, which is necessary, ... Perhaps mothers with newborns exhibit intense hostility or intolerance toward anything threatening their offspring, but that is an instinctive, hormonal reaction. I wouldn't link that to a "dislike of differing viewpoints." That is a massive leap in logic.
Attempting to connect oxytocin, a hormone with purely biological purposes, to a social flaw like intolerance toward different perspectives seems like a highly strained analogy to me.
Chemistry is one thing and psychology is another. While they are related, one cannot be explained solely by the other because they operate on two different levels, each governed by its own set of rules.
It is reductive to isolate a single influence from a lower level and present it as some kind of "ultimate cause."