Still, there are aspects of it that bother me in their implications when taken and employed in a social context.
Well I suppose it bothers me too.
Even though at a stretch we might accept "The Lucifer Principle" as a scientific principle, it is I believe a false principle.
It is a false principle which claims that certain kinds of (usually) undesirable behaviour are inevitably widespread.
Such theories are often used to justify the relevant behaviour, if not by the author then by others, so its not exactly morally neutral.
The best response is to argue the falsity of the principle.
Howard's own evidence, selected though it is to support "The Lucifer Principle", in fact convinces me (at least the two books together) that human behaviour is about as good or bad on the whole as the expectations of the group.
This may be rather bad when times are hard, but sustained prosperity makes way for "cultural evolution" and more civilised behaviour.
My own life has been almost totally free of violence, and I think myself fortunate but not exceptional in that regard.