Even though the positions Wrangham/Peterson and Sussman take on the question are humans inherently evil are completely opposite they use similar data, but in different ways. Wrangham and Peterson say yes humans are inherently evil, and that it is genetic caused be sexual selection. They use our relation to chimpanzees as one example, chimps are our closest relative, using studies that show how close their behavior is to ours. They also pointed out that chimps have been known to attack and kill neighboring chimps. Another point they argue is that male pride is the source for much of the conflicts. Sussman on the other hand argues that no, we are not inherently evil, and that it is learned and caused by our social conditions. He also say that…show more content… They both used chimpanzees as one piece of data to support their argument, but Sussman pointed out the flaws in saying they are a good example of relatives of ours that are inherently violent. He also points out that Wrangham/Petersons theory is similar to theories presented in the past, and it is also similar to “early European and christan beliefs about human ethics and morality”(35). Wrangham/Petersons had another flaw in assuming that the demonic male theory in chimps and humans have a similar pattern. They both had strengths in their arguments, but both of their arguments had flaws. Sussman pointed out the flaws Wrangham/Petersons article had. The flaws in Sussmans come from how he pointed out more flaws in the other argument while presenting less supporting points. Overall there is very little in common between the two positions, “one hopes to explain behavior as a consequence of natural selection, whereas the other position looks to cultural…show more content… Looking at these primates gives a look into how humans could have been before we evolved to the point we are currently at. Out of both of these primates though the chimpanzees would be expected to be more useful to understand human behavior than the bonobos. Chimps are more closely related to us and evolved separately for a shorter period of time than we have with bonobos. Chimps have been seen to violently attack other groups or other chimps within their own group when there is competition for food. On the other hand the bonobos might be a good example showing that we may not be inherently violent due to the fact that they are still closely related to us but are more peace loving than chimpanzees. Both chimps and bonobos can give a good perspective on how humans evolved to where we are, and whether or not we are inherently violent. Sussman points our that we also have the ability to learn how to behave by watching bonobos, which says a lot about the usefulness of studying