Ethology and man: science or myth?

What is known of human evolution gives us little help in describing the biological nature of man: even our fossil history is obscure, and most statements on the evolution of human behaviour are guesses. The fact that primitive man was a predator on other species does not signify that man is "naturally aggressive" to his own kind. The notion of an inherent drive to aggression has no scientific foundation. Knowledge of the conduct of other species can lead to no valid conclusions about human behaviour. The same limitations apply to interpretations of modern man based on what is known of human hunter-gatherers. Ethology can contribute to human studies (1) by providing methods of observing and analysing behaviour, and (2) by providing hypotheses that can be tested. Zoologically-based hypotheses on the ill effects of crowding have been useful but have proved to be wrong. Others on the effects of stimulation in early life, and on breast-feeding and milk composition, have been more fruitful. Abnormal conduct, such as that of Kanner's syndrome, can be usefully studied by ethological methods. Man is a learner and a teacher, whose knowledge of himself increases slowly with the growth of critical research.