ABSTRACT
The varying limits of tolerance for in-group aggression under different kinds of technological and social-structural conditions is an example of invariant. To explore the historical reasons for the development of the different social systems themselves is beyond the scope of the field of comparative ethics. The biologist does not have to enter into the moral problems of evaluating particular animal forms in noting that ones which cannot meet the challenge of competition for a particular ecological niche are wiped out. But an ethical assessment has to render explicit how far it is using life or health or avoiding such massive frustrations that it is impossible to achieve any values whatsoever, as ethical criteria, and whether they are taken as goods, or as necessary conditions of other goods. The former demands more knowledge from sociology, psychology, history, as well as comparative anthropology.
