Historically this was the case. — ovdtogt

Well even if it was it isn’t now. I don’t believe you would be able to kill a stranger in cold blood, if you did, even in another culture you would be charged with murder, the worst crime of all. And even if that culture went soft on you your own culture would condemn you for the crime of taking a life.

I think you should study history. Perhaps even start with Jane Goodall's observation of chimpanzees in the wild.

I’m not sure what you mean.

Throughout history man has been active in tribal warfare. Witness the many genocides that have taken place. Most wars are to a large extent 'ethnic cleansing'. Jane Goodall observed a group of chimpanzees that formally lived together as 1 extended family, split into 2 groups. At a certain stage they started attacking each other until 1 group was completely wiped out.

This is not the case for members outside of this group (the other, the stranger). These people can be killed with impunity. — ovdtogt

I understand that you are trying to demonstrate that man can kill others and how and why we do it.

But what I was getting at was that you personally could not walk out your door and kill someone in cold blood, even if it was ‘the other’, and if you did you would be judged harshly for doing so. Why is that?

You might be interested in this story https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutiny_on_the_Bounty This illustrates what happens when we can behave 'immorally'.

I’m not saying that we don’t or can’t act immorally. History makes that very clear. And it’s a very tired argument that we know what is immoral because we are moral creatures. Why we do these thing is another matter, don’t you think?

We do whatever we believe is to our advantage under the specific circumstances we find ourselves in at that time and place; altruistically or selfishly. If you can't beat them (the other, stranger), join them. and if neither is possible: avoid them