Mason  🏃‍♂️ ✂️

But isn't there evidence that children under 4 are the most violent humans. eg.engage in biting and hitting at alarming rates because they haven't been properly socialised yet. Is this what people are implicitly referring to? Using anger as a means to get one's way.

Well, the causal explanations of human thinking and behaviour that are tacitly assumed in that way of putting it are false. So, no there isn't.

And, yes they are.

So I guess the issue is that you reject attributing this behviour to children because even if it's more prevalent for young children there exists a better explanation ie using violence or anger to get one's way is morally bad?

If they get their way, what's the point of violence & anger? But they don't, do they? So I want a deeper explanation: why is someone in a situation where they seemingly want something impossible, and futilely hurt themselves when they don't get it? This can't have evolved, right?

Cries presumably evolved to signal distress to a parent. But when a child learns that crying can be used as a means of obtaining what they want in all situations and this is reinforced by the parents it leads to legitimising certain behaviour.

Sort of. But that's again a backwards way of putting it. Here's an intuition pump: Think what you'd guess a husband is really doing, if he says that very thing about his wife.

I think what your getting at is that it's the husband who is in the wrong for allowing violence to become the only recourse?