With the Development of Intellegence comes the Inherent Advancement of Evil

1) A statistical increase in violence and hostility through the ages is far to broad and can never be obtained, especially because often the frequency of violence and hostility posesses an inverse correlation with its seriousness and severity. Rather, as pointed out by the Con, they have remained relatively the same, but intellectual advances such as technology has obviously become more sophisticated as time has worn on. For this reason, man has logically found it less and less necessary to resort to extreme measures for the sole purpose of survival. So if the need has reduced but the violence has remained the same, an alterior motive must be present, ergo greed and evil. 2) I disagree with my opponents clain that Selfishness = Survival. Survival is defined as simply the ability to ENDURE during adverse circumstances. Take the Inca-Spanish example given earlier for instance, there is no proof given by the Con to support the idea that a ransom on their Emporer as well as a preemptive and brutal murder of the Incan citizens was necessary at all. The Spanish certainly could have ENDURED with the establishment of strategic treaties and humane capture (with the proper treatment of slaves as exhibited by the Greek Empire, for instance) to both acheive their land conquering objectives and simultaneously exhibiting compassion for their fellow species. Only when their life was threatened (which it was not) does the survival issue come into play. Mainly greed, as stated previously, fueled their actions in this particular instance. 3) Though families or groups of animals have been seen to feud with one another for territory and resources (again, killing for the purpose of survival), I am curious as to the Leopards and Whales hunting for sport, and ask for sources on that particular peice of information. The intent of the Chicken-Fratricide argument was to show that the animals exampled by the Con such as eagles, sharks, and Hyena's do kill for the purpose of survival, but not of excessive greed or revenge (only kill to the extent necessary). If the Con's agrument held to be true, then the evidence would be seen in animals with the overwhelming capacity to kill (snakes, etc. ) as they would be a bigger concern to Human and Animal populations. 4) Excessive wealth and posessions has never been a criteria for enduring under adverse circumstances. Even to provide for one's offspring does not require EXCESSIVE wealth or posessions because by the time the third generation has come to need the resources to live, the second generation has already strategized and is teaching the principles of "enduring under adverse curcumstances", so beyond the point of childhood the capacity for greed at the expense of others is indeed unjustified for both humand and animals alike, making the Con's point void. 5) Whatever profit the Mafia made did most certainly not go towards personal survival but rather the spoils of power and illegal cartels, essentially unneeded pleasure at the expense of others, as previously stated. And regardless of the reason of instances such as the Holocaust, it remains that only a species with developed intellegence could have planned and initiated such an awful plot. 6) Since nuclear intellegence has inadvertently promoted evil ideals by opening up the possibilities and therefore the desire to carry it out, it has in essence spurred evil and its ability to be used in the modern world on a wider scale. SO in conclusion, the evolution of the mind and the development of intellegence not only provides the means by which to carry out evil as stated by the Con, but the ability and therefore the want to carry it out. I also wish to thank my very worthy opponent, this debate is excellent practice.