To: " learn morality from chimps?".
I think this is a good point to discuss because
- we stick to the issue: evolution
- thus we avoid sustained discussions on God
which, because religion is mainly faith based
may not get us very far with the evolutionary crowd
which is evidence based, ( presumably ).
So far the evidence-based findings of morality in animals
is batting 0-0-0-0-.
Why?
Well first of all because we cannot define morality with
a single/unified definition.
Morality changes from place to place and time to time.
It is important not to confuse morality with guidance for self-preservation.
I am tired of hearing, " well we all accept don't kill
and don't steal".
That is a utilitarian ethos: we decided it is easier to
call a truce than to hunt each other down in the bush,
for his wife or belongings.
Also do not confuse morality with right or wrong: again
that varies from place to place, time to time, and
person to person.
So then, if we as humans don't have a clear,
uniform agreement on what is right or wrong and we
live a mostly utilitarian life, how can we
extrapolate that back to
chimps.
In fact most of what animals do for self preservation
( and us too perhaps ) is called instinct.
Animals are preprogrammed to behave in a self
interested way that has nothing to do with morality,
right or wrong but simply with self preservation.
We in fact I think have one paramount characteristic which seems to defy evolutionary concepts:
freedom of choice
freedom to do something against our best
interests
Perhaps in another thread we can talk in greater detail about this because this is key to understanding the Judeo-Christian God.
Back to evolution however; out of the blue, human's
appear and all of a sudden become capable of a
startling ability: the ability to chose to do
something against their self-interest as well as their
life, simply because they love another person
( oftentimes a total stranger; neither their
children or spouses or parents ) more than
themselves, and die for him/her .
BTW this a salient characteristic of Christianity,
Christian love, ( although it may be found elsewhere ).
So how do you explain from an evolutionary viewpoint that
this characteristic?
- especially when it established itself out of the blue, right after Jesus Christ dies?
-with only milliseconds in evolutionary time ( 1999 years )
it spreads like fire to become ( Judeo-Christianity ) the largest religion in the world?
-why would genes select out a philosophy that puts
another person's interests ahead of your own?
This idea appears to be transmitted through words and
not through genes. How and why?
Of course Dawkins would say that that <I. Christianity
is a pathology of the mind it has something to do
with memes , computer viruses of the mind, etc.
So then Christianity is a disease of the mind. When on the othe rhand you call it altruism then it is OK then it is just secular humanism.(Pity that we don't have hordes of altruists around to help us along.)
I think these are things that young mushy minds In Kansas
need to start debating early in life because
it may take a while to shed light on all their minds. sometimes a lifetime. Better to start early,
TA
Message #889 from TigerPaw at Sep 20 1999 9:29AM
b) is morality related to genes? ...
The test of this concept is to look for moral patterns in animals. The altruism of honeybees or the protection of the elephant herd by the matriarch. Those
morals that get more complex than these,
especially those which have variation in different
cultures are more likely to spring from the intellect. (Memes
not Genes).
TP |
