Dan you said:
>Let me ask you your views on the following cosmological problem that I have
>with the conclusion.  I have no problem accepting the conclusion of the bird
>behaviour FOR BIRDS.  Indeed, geese in flight do a similar thing, rotating
>out of the most difficult point position.

Dan, ethology is a science that permits us to infer certain behavior
and social characteristics that can be applied to human society.
The conclusions are just as valid as the laws of genetics which
have been discovered through research on fruitflies, rats, plants etc..
Because these experiments were NOT done on humans does it mean
they are not valid for humans?..Of course they are!

Science discovers and describes what "IS". It is very important to keep
this in mind because we frequently jump this step and then erroneously
arrive at the conclusion that it doesn't apply to man. It does! High
density in rat populations increases violence. Cooperative behavior
in social animals is necessary for survival. This is true and valid
for humans and animals.

I think in the back of your mind you have the following unspoken premise.

"Humans have the freedom and power to "choose" the way they will
react to a certain situation and therefore transcend their natural
animal condition."

You're right! We do!...Whether we will actually use that power and freedom
remains to be seen...So far, our record hasn't been too good in this
department. As John Pfeiffer said in his book the "Emergence of Man".
"We are still anthropoids but with an atom bomb in our hands".
Not a very conforting thought, is it? <g>

>But I have an existential belief that there is another plane of existence
>in addition to survival in this dimension.  Specifically, that the universe
>as we know it is the product of an awesome energy-information source commonly
>called God or equivalent.  I suspect that there are many paths to learning
>about and synchronizing our activities to be in harmony with this source.
>Through historical accident, the path that I have traveled is Christianity,
>one tenet of which is "love your enemy" (turn the other cheek, etc.).
>Unfortunately, I often fail at accomplishing this imperative.  However, when
>I succeed, I find it incredibly liberalizing in the sense of freeing me from
>my antipathies and somehow transforming the negative relationship into at
>least a tolerable one and sometimes a positive one.  That, in turn, has
>implications for a kind of "force-field" for proliferating goodness
>(altruism, etc.).  This, however, seems to be a contradiction of the bird
>behaviour which shuns the non-reciprocators (or negative people?).  Yet in
>my experience it seems to work in a paradoxical fashion and actually
>increase survival power by neutralizing negative and destructive tendencies
>and relationships.  If I have managed to make sense in communicating what I
>am trying to say, how would you react to it?  Thanks.  Dan

You raise some very interesting points.
First.- You obviously believe we can synchcronize our behavior to a God
which is a universal source of harmony. Ok...personally I am an agnostic,
but this doesn't matter. The important point you raise is that there is a
superior "something or someone" with whom we can identify and therefore
transcend our animal instinct and "humanize" our behavior.
This is good! <g>...and like you say there are many paths to follow.

Second.- You follow the path of Christianity. Christ said: "Love thy Enemy"
and somehow you believe the uncooperative behavior of the birds towards those
who are not "friendly" is in contradiction to this Christian ideal.
Ok...I have a tremendous love and admiration for nature. Does this
mean I would go out into a field during an electric storm? Does it mean
I would let a scorpion sting my hand? Obviously not! Does it mean I don't
love them? Of course not! I do love them, but "loving your enemy" doesn't
mean giving him the oportunity to destroy you! <g>

"Turning the other cheek" has been erroneoulsy interpreted this way.
It can also mean: "Don't answer aggression with aggression". It is stopping
the circle of violence by not responding. This is not unlike what Ghandi
proposed, and if you notice, it is not that different to what the birds did
in this community I mentioned before. The bird didn't go and "kill" the
uncooperative bird but he didn't continue cleaning him either. It is a form
of passive resitance towards evil.

Love and forgiveness are ways in which we can become more human but
Christ also said:
"Be as as harmless as a dove but as cunning as the serpent".
Silvia