The Editor, Sir:

Martin Henry's article (The Sunday Gleaner, July 20) on the relationship of athletic prowess and aggression is an interesting one as a philosophical argument.

However, the search for a link is unsubstantiated by the evidence.

I have been associated with athletics in Jamaica, as a participator and an observer since the late 1950s, and have had contact with some of our greatest.

To the best of my recollection, none of them have ever killed anyone with knowledge afore-thought and, as a matter of fact, most of those I know are gentle people, who have been outstanding citizens.

Will to survive

It is easy to accept the special genes as contributory to Jamaica's success in the sprint arena because the evidence is voluminous. But to suggest that as the fastest 'animals', they also may be predatory in nature is a stretch.

Could it be, sir, that survival of both the Middle Passage and the rigours of slavery have affected succeeding generations and have instilled in them the will to survive, which, in turn, has evolved into violent aggression?

Darwin's underlining of the 'survival of the fittest' is apropos in this instance. Could it be that this has been enforced by the continued hardship imposed by classism and the cultural influences of centuries of exposure to 'dog eat dog' that the colonial's dropped into our laps?

I would think that violence and aggression is a psychological rather than a physiological issue. There is no natural link here between them.

One as to do with nurture and the other has to do with nature. We can culture aggression and violence but there is a limit to where we can go with nurturing athletic prowess.

I am, etc.,

S. PETER CAMPBELL Sr.

speterc@aol.com

Havertown, PA