Home » Academics » Lecture Hall

Uncovering Our Animalistic Nature

A Walk on the Wild Side

Nothing seems to rival nature documentaries in their ability to provide jaw-dropping, nausea-inducing insight into animal behavior. For some curious children, these television programs are their first introduction to the grittier side of life, with topics like "When is it okay to kill your offspring?", "If another monkey stole your favorite spot, is it okay to push him in the river?" or, most provocatively, "What happens when you're the slowest zebra in the herd?"

As we view these programs, we can nestle up to the notion that animals are fundamentally brutal, unceasingly competitive, indifferent to the suffering of the weak and obsessed with satisfying their needs, and people are not.

Advocates of evolutionary theory, however, are quick to point out that the differences in the behavior of humans and animals really aren't that significant.

Are evolutionists really all that far off?

Consider the behavior of the contestants on reality TV shows, who are encouraged to achieve, conquer and otherwise dominate their fellow contestants — and usually for rather paltry prizes. Is there much doubt that reality TV displays the same kind of animalistic impulses showcased in nature documentaries? Through this culturally permissive voyeurism, we watch the lengths people go to satisfy their passions, even though the situations are incredibly petty and seemingly far from the sorts of life-threatening realities of the animal world. We watch people make poor choices and get selected out, whether because they are overly ambitious or fail to be ambitious enough. Many of these shows actually tout survival-of-the-fittest type themes, with contestants vying for limited resources and doing their best to outwit fellow competitors. As viewers, we may even begin to adapt our own behaviors in similar situations to avoid this kind of natural selection.

Keeping in mind the similarities of animal documentaries and reality TV, one might argue that perhaps the development of evolutionary theory by Darwin and his intellectual successors benefitted more from projecting human behavior onto animals than the other way around. We can dismiss the similarities between animal behavior and human behavior — citing, for instance, how we are made "in the image of God" and animals are not — but we are misguided in doing so. We should not settle for such a naïve understanding of human nature.

In reality, we humans, like animals, are not autonomous from our own physiology. But the question is: Are we more than animals?

Tunneling between the Mind and Body

Seeing the parallels between the behavior of humans and animals can be quite unsettling. Animals are considered not to have souls, and their minds are believed to be rooted entirely in their physiology. Humans, on the other hand, have both a mind and a soul — we are not just physical in our nature. Humans can act morally or immorally, ethically or unethically, while animals simply act. Human behavior can be good or bad in a way animal behavior cannot.

Yet, traditional boundaries between mind, body, and soul may very well turn out to be arbitrary "lines of demarcation" — at least to some degree. Research in cognitive science reveals that a number of behaviors, in both animals and humans, have neurophysiological bases. Such findings indicate that, by satisfying basics needs, both people and animals are unknowingly self-regulating their own brain chemistry.

Consider the neurotransmitter serotonin, which has been shown to be linked to a variety of functions in the body. Recent studies show that low levels of serotonin increase impulsive aggression in threatening social interactions.¹ So, if you've ever been in one of those situations where you feel backed into a corner and start to lose your temper, your ability to control your temper may be hindered by something as simple as not having enough serotonin in your brain.

Researchers made this observation by regulating the amount of tryptophan (from which serotonin is synthesized) in the diets of the volunteers in the study. Tryptophan is an essential amino acid in the human diet — the body cannot make it on its own but must acquire it from the protein in food. This means that what we eat affects what goes on in our brains, which, it turn, impacts our behavior.

Now let's consider a mother's maternal love for her child — a more positive human behavior not tied to the satisfaction of primitive needs in an obvious way. It seems that the smiling face of a baby actually elicits within the mother's brain a release of dopamine. Dopamine is part of a system in our brains that helps us to repeat certain actions that the brain deems as beneficial. In other words, dopamine triggers the brain's reward center.

Interestingly, the areas of the brain activated by dopamine are the same ones associated with drug addiction, suggesting that this "natural high" is a hard-wired mechanism that promotes mother-infant bonding.² Moms don't love their babies solely because it makes them feel good, but the evidence suggests that even those behaviors we would hold up as being pure and innocent are actually deeply rooted in a positive reinforcement mechanism of our physiology.

Scientific research is showing us that, just as we can observe in animals, both our vices and our virtues are driven, at least in part, by our physical nature.

Beyond "Good" and "Evil" Behaviors

So, if some of our natural drives — whether appearing to be self-satisfying or not — are part of the fundamental function of our bodies, are the evolutionists right? Are we all animals?

Undoubtedly, scientific research will continue to show that many of the components of our personalities, thoughts and emotions are connected to the anatomy and physiology of our brains. But such evidence presents no threat to a biblical worldview. After all, it was God who "knit" us together in the womb in the first place.³ He designed our brains to function and affect us the way they do. What is damaging to our worldviews is to accept this as the end of the story.

Much of the Bible deals with human behavior — from the Old Testament stories about people choosing to obey or disobey God, to the instructions in the Epistles on how to act in a way that reflects Christ.

It is convenient to reduce human behavior to "good" and "bad" acts and ignore the heart behind the act. This is a limited, simplified view that was as abused by the Pharisees as it is today. Considering our physiological drives to satisfy our own needs, we need a different standard to assess whether our actions are pleasing to God. Just as Jesus made clear when He spoke of the two greatest commandments,⁴ perhaps we should measure the goodness of our actions by the degree to which they satisfy others' needs over our own.

Human, All Too Human

The fact that modern science has attributed these behaviors to specific chemicals in the brain should only help us appreciate the commands and cautions of God more. We've been warned about the power of the flesh. Yet we, like the people of the Bible, have varying degrees of disregard for the power of our animalistic drives. But temptation is lurking, just as the serpent lurked in the Garden of Eden. Our flesh finds clever ways to get its fix — it wants to make our physical needs our top priority.

C O F F E E  S H O P

---

Are we humans truly able to overcome our "animalistic tendencies"?

Join the discussion!

Here's the take-home principle: In every action, we can behave as animals and struggle toward self-preservation and self-fulfillment. Or we can behave like Christ did on earth by continuously rising above the fleshly nature, casting aside the temptation of autonomy, and choosing God's way.

Rather than going the way of the animals, as many contestants on reality shows do, we must strive to demonstrate love to others. Only by doing so will we differentiate ourselves from the beasts of this world.