1. Racial Issues: From the Origin of Blacks
While the tigers cooled their bodies in the dirty water the dogs moved around hopping unconcernedly over the huge striped heads that rested on the concrete rim of the pool. The dogs were walking snacks, but the tigers evidently failed to perceive them as such" (de Waal 647). This, de Waal believes, proves that animals are kind to one another and survive that way, not by killing one another for food. De Waal seemingly asks the question that "if there really was a natural instinct in the animals of only the strong survive, wouldn't the mother dog kill the tiger cubs immediately, knowing that they would be a threat later on?" maybe you could also ask why the tigers don't just kill the mother dog? They are bigger, stronger, faster, and more adapt to living in the wild then dogs are. If there is any type of survival of the fittest instinct, one of these two species has to eventually kill each other, right? Not if a cat becomes a dog.
When originally explaining the situation about the tiger cubs and the dogs, De Waal explains the reason the tigers are coexisting with the dogs is due to the fact that the tigers were raised from cubs by the mother dog. In fact "the mother was said to be top dog over everyone else" (647). I think that if anything, this supports the idea of survival of the fittest. The tigers and momma dog are in captivity so there natural instincts are already conflicting. I"m sure that there instincts tell them to eat the humans at first, but when there young and don't have to stalk a wild bore because the zoo guy is feeding them out of a bottle, they push down those instincts to kill because they see the human as a care giver or a mother figure. If the animals in the zoo never face any real threat, why would they perceive anything as game of survival? There is no incentive to kill or be killed, when you haven't been in that situation. .
Go out to the jungle and find a REAL wild momma dog and her cubs and a REAL wild tiger cub and put them together.