57-9-262
Sexual success, by contrast, tends to dampen criminal behaviour down. Getting married and having childrenin other words, achieving at least part of his Darwinian ambitionoften terminates a criminal's career. Again, that is a commonplace observation. However, it tends to be explained as 'the calming influence of marriage', which is not really an explanation at all. 'Ambition fulfilled' is a better one.
The murder of children, too, can be explained evolutionarily. On the face of things it makes no sense to kill the vessels carrying your genes into the next generation. And, indeed, that is not what usually happens. But sociologists failed to notice this. It was not until Dr Daly and Dr Wilson began researching the field that it was discovered that a child under five is many times more likely to die an unnatural death in a household with a stepfather present (whether or not that relationship has been formalised by law) than if only biological parents are there.
In this, humans follow a pattern that is widespread in mammals: male hostility to a female's offspring from previous matings. In some species, such as lions and langurs, this results in deliberate infanticide. In humans things not are always as brutal and explicit. But neglect and a low threshold of irritation at the demands of a dependent non-relative can have the same effect.
Intriguingly, though, if a genetic parent is the killer it is often the mother. Infanticidal mothers are usually young. A young mother has many years of potential reproduction ahead of her. If circumstances do not favour her at the time (perhaps the father has deserted her) the cost to her total reproductive output of bringing up a child may exceed the risk of killing it. Not surprisingly, maternal infanticide is mainly a crime of poor, single women
A. ¾îÈÖ
by contrast ´ëÁ¶ÀûÀ¸·Î. dampen ¾àÇÏ°Ô ÇÏ´Ù, ÃàÃàÇØÁö´Ù. terminate ³¡³»´Ù.
commonplace Æò¹üÇÑ. fulfill ÃæÁ·ÇÏ´Ù. vessel »ç¶÷, ±×¸©, ¹è. stepfather ͩݫ(°èºÎ).
formalise °ø½ÄÈÇÏ´Ù, Á¤½ÄÀ¸·Î ÇÏ´Ù. biological parents ßæÝ«Ù½(»ýºÎ¸ð).
mammal Æ÷À¯µ¿¹°. hostility îØëò(ÀûÀÇ), îØËÅãý(Àû°³½É). previous ì¤îñ(ÀÌÀü)ÀÇ.
mating °áÈ¥, ÎßÛÕ(±³¹è). langur ¿ø¼þÀÌÀÇ ÀÏÁ¾. deliberate °íÀÇÀûÀÎ.
infanticide êêä®ß¯úª(À¯¾Æ»ìÇØ). brutal ¾ß¸¸ÀûÀÎ, ÀÜÀÎÇÑ. explicit ¸í¹éÇÑ, ¼ÖÁ÷ÇÑ.
threshold Ãâ¹ßÁ¡, ¹ß´Ü, ¹®Áö¹æ. irritation Â¥Áõ³»´Â °Í, ȳ»´Â °Í.
dependent ÀÇÁöÇϰí ÀÖ´Â, Á¾¼ÓµÇ¾î ÀÖ´Â, ºÎ¾ç°¡Á·, ÐöãÝíº(±â½ÄÀÚ).
non-relative Ç÷¿¬Àû ģôÀÌ ¾Æ´Ñ »ç¶÷. intriguingly Àç¹ÌÀÖ°Ôµµ, Èï¹Ì¸¦ µ¸±¸´Â. genetic parent ßæÝ«Ù½(»ýºÎ¸ð). potential reproduction »ý½ÄÀÇ ÀáÀçÀû °¡´É¼º.
desert ¹ö¸®´Ù.
B. ±¸¹®
- But neglect and a low threshold . . . the same effect.
[ģôÀÌ ¾Æ´Ñ ºÎ¾ç°¡Á·(ÀǺ׾ƵéÀ̳ª µþ)ÀÇ ¿ä±¸¸¦ ¹«½ÃÇϰųª ±× ¿ä±¸¿¡ ½±°Ô ȸ¦
³»´Â °ÍÀº (»çÀÚ°¡ ÀǺ×ÀÚ½ÄÀ» Á×ÀÌ´Â °Í°ú °°Àº) °á°ú¸¦ °¡Áø´Ù]
- the cost to her total . . .the risk of killing it.
[ÇÑ ¾ÆÀ̸¦ ¾çÀ°ÇÏ´Â µ¥ µé¾î°¡´Â »ý½Äºñ¿ëÀÇ ÃѾ×ÀÌ ±× ¾ÆÀ̸¦ »ìÇØÇÏ´Â À§ÇèÀ» ÃʰúÇÒÁöµµ ¸ð¸¥´Ù(¾ÆÀ̸¦ »ìÇØÇÏ´Â °ÍÀÌ ¾çÀ°ÇÏ´Â °Íº¸´Ù´Â º¸´Ù ¸¹Àº »ý½Ä¿¡ µµ¿òÀÌ µÈ´Ù)]
57-10-263
Many people might sympathise with those driven to commit this particular form of homicide. But in general crimes such as murder and rape provoke a desire to punish the perpetrators, not to forgive them. That, too, is probably an evolved responseand it may well be a uniquely human one. No court sits in judgment over a drake who has raped a duck. A lioness may try to defend her cubs against infanticide, but if she fails she does not plan vengeance against the male who did it. Instead, she usually has sex with him. Yet ideas of revenge and punishment lie deep in the human psyche.
¡¦and punishment
Economists were long puzzled, for example, by the routine outcome of a game in which one player divides a sum of money between himself and a competitor, who then decides whether the shares are fair. If the second player decides the shares are not fair, neither player gets anything.
What is curious about this game is that, in order to punish the first player for his selfishness, the second player has deliberately made himself worse off by not accepting the offer. Many evolutionary biologists feel that the sense of justice this illustrates, and the willingness of one player to punish the other, even at a cost to himself, are among the things that have allowed humans to become such a successful, collaborative species. In the small social world in which humans evolved, people dealt with the same neighbours over and over again. Punishing a cheat has desirable long-term consequences for the person doing the punishing, as well as for the wider group. In future, the cheat will either not deal with him or will do so more honestly. Evolution will favour the development of emotions that make such reactions automatic.
A. ¾îÈÖ
sympathise with µ¿ÀÇÇÏ´Ù, Âù¼ºÇÏ´Ù, °ø°¨ÇÏ´Ù. drive ¸ô¾Æ ºÎÄ¡´Ù.
commit ¹üÇÏ´Ù. homicide »ìÀÎ. provoke ÀÚ±ØÇÏ´Ù, ¼±µ¿ÇÏ´Ù, µµ¹ßÇÏ´Ù.
uniquely À¯ÀÏÇϰÔ. sit in judgement over(on) ...À» ÀçÆÇÇÏ´Ù.
drake=male duck ¼ö¿À¸®. cub »õ³¢. vengeance º¹¼ö. revenge. psyche Á¤½Å, ¿µÈ¥.
puzzle ´çȲÇÏ´Ù. routine ßÈÖÇ(»ó·Ê)ÀûÀÎ, ÆÇ¿¡ ¹ÚÈù.
routine outcome Ç×»ó µ¿ÀÏÇÏ°Ô ³ª¿À´Â °á°ú. sum ±Ý¾×. competitor °æÀïÀÚ.
share ¸ò, ¹è´ç¾×. fair °øÁ¤ÇÑ. selfishness À̱âÀûÀÓ. deliberately °íÀÇÀûÀ¸·Î.
badly off ÁÖ¸Ó´Ï »çÁ¤ÀÌ ÁÁÁö ¾Ê´Ù, °¡³ÇÏ°Ô »ì´Ù.
the sense of justice ïáëùÊï(Á¤Àǰ¨). illustrate çÓñû(¿¹Áõ)ÇÏ´Ù. collaborative Çùµ¿ÀûÀÎ.
cheat ¼ÓÀÌ´Â »ç¶÷, »ç±â²Û.
ÇÑ´«¿¡ º¸´Â
º£½ºÆ® ±â»ç
- 1 ÇØ¼öºÎ 'ºÎ»ê ÀÎÀç'´Â ¾î¶»°Ô ¹ß±¼ÇØ¾ß Çϳª
- 2 ¹®Çå(ÙþúÌ)°ú ¼Ã¥(ßöóü)ÀÇ Â÷ÀÌ
- 3 ÀÌÀç¸í ´ëÅë·ÉÀº ÀÚ½ÅÀ» À§Çؼ¶óµµ °ÅºÎ±ÇÀ» Çà»çÇØ¾ß!
- 4 À±¼®¿°ú ±è¿ëÇö, Dumb and Dumber
- 5 'ùÛÏÐ ÙãáÔìÑ æêîî'À» Àаí
- 6 ÀÌÇýÈÆ »çÅ·Π°¡Àå ¿ì½À°Ô µÈ »ç¶÷Àº À嵿Çõ!
- 7 û¿Í´ë¸¦ ¿Å±â¸é Á¤±ÇÀÌ ¸ÁÇÏ°í ¼öµµ¸¦ ¿Å±â¸é ³ª¶ó°¡ ¸ÁÇÑ´Ù!
- 8 ºÒ¹ý°ú °ÅÁþ¸» °ø°³¼±µ¿ ¹ý´ë±³¼ö¸¦ ÀÚ¸£Áö ¾Ê´Â ±¹¹Î´ëÇÐ
- 9 ºÏÇÑ ±¹¹ÎÀÇ ´«°ú ±Í¸¦ ¸·´Â »ç¶÷µé
- 10 ÀÌÀç¸í ´ëÅë·ÉÀÇ ÇØº´´ë µ¶¸³ ÃßÁøÀº ½ÅÁßÇØ¾ß












