In a similar fashion to Jeremy Narber, De Waal focuses his research on intelligence in nature. De Waal is a primatologist, so most of his observations come from chimpanzees, apes, bonobo monkeys and capuchin monkeys. He asserts that human empathy is different from primate and mammalian empathy by degree, not kind. To think that animals have such a different degree of characteristics thought to be uniquely human is to overlook the evidence, or to create lab paradigms that don't properly test for such characteristics. Primates show a lot of characteristics that are remarkably "human," according to De Waal. From food sharing, cooperation to caring for young and even politicking, a lot of primates act so much like humans in similar (human) situations that primatologists consider these traits a pre-human adaptation necessary for social animals like mice, wolves, monkeys, ravens, etc. Empathy, then, was a social animal adaptation that balanced selfishness (like getting enough food) with cooperation (ensuring others get enough food). A monkey hierarchy is replete with intimidation, violence, coercion and grooming and compassion. Violence might be used to maintain order, but compassion in the form of touching, eye contact and conflict resolution is also apparent. Humans, too, have these traits, though in different levels of intensity and complexity. Instead of breaking branches and throwing feces, we drop bombs and use the media for propaganda.
De Waal and his fellow researchers see in such similarities hope for humans. Instead of thinking that it's a dog eat dog world, it might be better to consider that community effort reaps large rewards that can be spread out according to effort involved, knowing that ability and success changes, thereby allowing for cohesion within the group, but variation in reward, within the context of the social hierarchy. A dog might eat a dog from time to time, but from time to time, dogs hunt together to take down game that as individuals would be impossible.
This ability to hunt together and to maintain cohesion within an aggressive, hierarchical group is due to feelings of empathy. Research has shown that animals will help each other even when direct rewards aren't a part of the exchange. Rewards do influence behaviour, however, but, strangely, the reward will be refused by monkeys if it is deemed unfair, either for or against the individual. The idea of fairness, then, seems to be a very old, innate, adaptation.
So, we may consider ourselves to be moral animals, whose ideas of justice and democracy are uniquely human and modern, but that would be inaccurate. Empathy exists across mammals who have to care for young and live in complex societies. Communities who live by balancing aggression, selfish need, community need and caring for others have the greatest chances for survival; otherwise, how else could we humans be here today?
