Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
06-29-2008, 01:55 PM | #191 | ||
Regular Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: California, United States
Posts: 382
|
Quote:
Quote:
I think it is you who misunderstand altruism. Altruism is simply the unselfish motivation to do good for others, without expecting reward or recognition (in some instances at the expenses of your own welfare). I have never said its about more offspring; but rather about social coherence. If humans (or any other social species) were completely devoid of altruism it is easy to see how such selfish behavior would be detrimental to a social group (and we'd be back as individual roamers). There would be nothing to assure the coherence of the group. The group would break up into individual creatures; each with its own distinctively selfish agenda. Altruism is vital for establishing a successful social network (human or animal). Altruism is often referred to as natures own golden rule (and is indeed very similar to the "Golden Rule of Ethics"). That we find this "golden rule of ethics" in animal behavior is astounding don't you think? |
||
06-29-2008, 06:43 PM | #192 |
Contributor
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Austin
Posts: 16,498
|
I altruism is evolutionarily derived it must be such that it passes the natural selection filter.
The natural selection filter selects for genes. The honeybee that sacrifices its life for the queen is protecting their own genes. When our white cells sacrifice themselves (and become pus) for the defense of the body as a whole they are protecting their own genes. When a behavior that is useful for survival in the ordinary course of events misfires then we get altruism. We feed birds from a bag on a bench. We feed cats and dogs. They get this for free. (Or maybe they got it by behaving in a cute and/or cuddly way... not quite for free.) The out-for-myself-except-in-mating-season is the rule in some species. Inter-species altruism is (except for mutual altruism) rare indeed. The bee does the service of pollination and gets well paid in return. This is an example of inter-species cooperation for mutual benefit, not altruism. Even intra-species altruism cannot be the norm. The individual in the group who only gives and gives with no expectation of reward would soon be out of wherewithal and could give no more. Morality cannot be based on 'altruism.' Instead, it is based on a proper Golden Rule. Mentally change places. Now, how would you like that 'other' in front of you to behave. Your guesses as to how to treat him come from two places. Your first guess is: What would I like if I were in his shoes. The second (and better) guess is to assume that that 'other' is also using the proper Golden Rule and reflect his behavior back at him. |
06-30-2008, 03:26 AM | #193 | |||||
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Roaming a wilderness that some think is real ...
Posts: 1,125
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||||
06-30-2008, 08:57 AM | #194 |
Regular Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: California, United States
Posts: 382
|
I am sorry for picking a single quote out like this; but this was the one line I really disagreed with. Morality seems to be the result of an evolved altrusitic basis, that, in the presence of exceptional intelligence and cultural development has been developed by the human race into what we see today. I can under no circumstance believe that an intelligent agent (i.e. God) planted this morality within us (although I admit ohmi's stance of only asserting "a God" is vastly better than asserting the existence of a denominational God), especially not when we can clearly observe the usefulness of basic moral knowledge in a social setting. Inter-species altruism is rare even in humans. It is evident only to the extent that it does not interfere with our survival (for example in food production).
Social evolution is even today a new field of research; but there is certainly a lot more evidence for evolved altruism than divinely planted altruism. The evolutionary mechanism we know exists; the divine mechanism we don't know exists. |
06-30-2008, 09:05 AM | #195 | ||||
Regular Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: California, United States
Posts: 382
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||
06-30-2008, 10:55 AM | #196 | |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Roaming a wilderness that some think is real ...
Posts: 1,125
|
Quote:
|
|
06-30-2008, 12:39 PM | #197 | ||
Regular Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: California, United States
Posts: 382
|
Quote:
You also misrepresented my statement. I have shown you that there is a reasonable evolutionary base for altruism. If it seems to be less prevalent today; it is partly because of cultural influence, but that doesn't mean that the altruistic basis isn't there anymore! You have yourself (correctly so) asserted that humans seems to have some kind of innate moral basis that they need to listen to. All I am saying is that instead of divine interference; human morality may just as well (and, in my opinion, even more so) be the result of evolved altruism, an exceptionally large brain and cultural influence. |
||
07-01-2008, 03:08 PM | #198 | |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Roaming a wilderness that some think is real ...
Posts: 1,125
|
Quote:
|
|
07-01-2008, 04:01 PM | #199 | |
Regular Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: California, United States
Posts: 382
|
Quote:
I hope you can see that I have never claimed that altruism was a genetic mechanism for increasing offspring; in fact I have, in several posts above, explicitly denied exactly this. |
|
07-02-2008, 03:28 AM | #200 | ||
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Roaming a wilderness that some think is real ...
Posts: 1,125
|
Quote:
|
||
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|