Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Other Topics > Science, Math, and Philosophy

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 11-19-2005, 04:36 PM
jthegreat jthegreat is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 27
Default Re: Morality and Evolution

[ QUOTE ]
Non-theistic morality will always come down to pragmatism, and that will always result in the reductio that might makes right. This has been discussed several times on the forum and no one has been able to counter this argument. I've often cited one of the more prominent atheists of the day, Michael Martin, who has written at least one book on atheistic morality. In the end, he had to admit he couldn't justify morality.


[/ QUOTE ]

Then he needs to read Ayn Rand's development of Objectivist ethics. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

As for morals only applying to men... morality is a guide by which we choose between alternatives in order to achieve or maintain our values. The concept of morality, by nature, only applies to sentient creatures who are faced with choosing between alternatives.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 11-19-2005, 05:47 PM
J. Stew J. Stew is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 191
Default Re: Morality and Evolution

I think there was evolution in consciousness, and morals evolved with the ability to open into the awareness that is already there. Lions thinks about themselves, how to survive, so they take the appropriate measures to give themselves the best chance for survival. We do the same thing i.e. slaughtering cows to ensure our existence. The difference with us is that we can look outside of ourselves. We can look at our selves as objects and ask, how can I ensure my existence as well as everyone else's existence. This initial, idealistic idea provides the intention from which other ideas about putting the ideal in practice stem. All the ideas about what is best for everyone revolve around what is best for yourself, or how your personal freedom should be enjoyed by all. When there is freedom in mind, there is personal truth. From this personal truth stems ideas about how to show others truth. Morals get muddled because people see personal truth through the lens of their attachments to ideas. It's a communication problem basically. The personal truth is the same in two different people, but the differing attachments in people's minds deludes the clarity of the truth, which leads to different interpretations of what truth is. So as consciousness expands, as people realize their thoughts they hold to as truth are not Ultimate truth, but a manifestation of truth skewed by one's own ideas about what truth is, then the understanding of purpose becomes more directed towards present momentness. As one remains more presently, or just looks at what is in front of one's face instead of conceptualizing everything it encounters, one sees that the truth of reality is just what is, not a conceptual interpretation of it. This leads to more seeing clearly which deepens the understanding of what it is to be present or in the moment. As the ability to balance in the present moment moves from practice to natural skill, the consciousness expands to take in more which leads to a greater understanding of what is moral, what is the correct way to act, what does it mean to be present, where one can live truly and not in delusion of reality. This understanding is still conceptual, but it is a conceptual understanding from a vaster(sp?) awareness or consciousness which leads to a different approach to morale. It is a different understanding, but it is actually the same understanding, just a clearer version of it.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 11-19-2005, 06:48 PM
atrifix atrifix is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 13
Default Re: Morality and Evolution

[ QUOTE ]
I am not sure about this post. Evolution, afaik, has to do with speciation, not with behavioural patterns. There may be an evolution of behavioural patterns but lets not confuse that with the theory of evolution. Enough garbage has been thrown at it, trying to muddy the waters.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is somewhat, but not completely, correct. There is extensive work in evolutionary theory (e.g., game-theoretic evolution) about behavioral patterns. However, behavioral evolution is not directly related to speciation based on mutations predicted by the "orthodox" Darwinian theory.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11-19-2005, 07:49 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Morality and Evolution

[ QUOTE ]
Morality seems to have no place for any other species but man. Why is that?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think most if not all higher-order mammals have societal/group/pack rules regarding what is and what is not acceptable behavior.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 11-19-2005, 09:40 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Morality and Evolution

[ QUOTE ]
This is somewhat, but not completely, correct. There is extensive work in evolutionary theory (e.g., game-theoretic evolution) about behavioral patterns. However, behavioral evolution is not directly related to speciation based on mutations predicted by the "orthodox" Darwinian theory.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree entirely with you. I was hoping to make it clear with the statement: "There may be an evolution of behavioural patterns but lets not confuse that with the theory of evolution". I think we must assume that the evolutionary debate has to do with the Darwinian theory and does not concerns itself with such things as game-theoretic, exo-evolution or evolution of culture, memes, psychological eveolution, etc.. All those topics are interesting in their own right, in fact even more interesting to me, but that is not what creationists object to.

Just to clarify. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 11-19-2005, 09:46 PM
purnell purnell is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 154
Default Re: Morality and Evolution

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Morality seems to have no place for any other species but man. Why is that?


[/ QUOTE ]

Non-theistic morality will always come down to pragmatism, and that will always result in the reductio that might makes right. This has been discussed several times on the forum and no one has been able to counter this argument. I've often cited one of the more prominent atheists of the day, Michael Martin, who has written at least one book on atheistic morality. In the end, he had to admit he couldn't justify morality.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your God-centered morality still reduces to "might makes right".
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 11-19-2005, 09:58 PM
Lestat Lestat is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 383
Default Re: Morality and Evolution

But doesn't higher moral standards come from increased intelligence and a bigger brain? Like someone said previously, other pack animals also display some standards for acceptable and unacceptable behavior.

I also have questions about the role of "Intelligence and Evolution". It seems we are WAY over equipped in the intelligence department for what we need for the survival and perpetuation of our species.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 11-19-2005, 10:03 PM
chezlaw chezlaw is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London, England
Posts: 58
Default Re: Morality and Evolution

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is somewhat, but not completely, correct. There is extensive work in evolutionary theory (e.g., game-theoretic evolution) about behavioral patterns. However, behavioral evolution is not directly related to speciation based on mutations predicted by the "orthodox" Darwinian theory.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree entirely with you. I was hoping to make it clear with the statement: "There may be an evolution of behavioural patterns but lets not confuse that with the theory of evolution". I think we must assume that the evolutionary debate has to do with the Darwinian theory and does not concerns itself with such things as game-theoretic, exo-evolution or evolution of culture, memes, psychological eveolution, etc.. All those topics are interesting in their own right, in fact even more interesting to me, but that is not what creationists object to.

Just to clarify. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]
Hi Midge, not sure where we draw the line on darwinian evolution but I suspect there is a large component of natural selection behind why we are moral creatures.

However the initial seed of cooperative behavior came about, it seems likely that those who chose a cooperative mate would have been more successful at reproduction. Once cooperation becomes a factor in sexual selection you get runaway evolution like with the peacocks tail leading to all these feelings about right and wrong which cause displays of extreme cooperative (moral) behavior and maybe even religon.

This could all happen even if cooperation wasn't advantageous but given we have reason to believe it is a significant advantage it makes this all the more likey.

chez
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 11-19-2005, 10:08 PM
J. Stew J. Stew is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 191
Default Re: Morality and Evolution

[ QUOTE ]
But doesn't higher moral standards come from increased intelligence and a bigger brain? Like someone said previously, other pack animals also display some standards for acceptable and unacceptable behavior.

I also have questions about the role of "Intelligence and Evolution". It seems we are WAY over equipped in the intelligence department for what we need for the survival and perpetuation of our species.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly, that's why we forget what's simple, what just is. We can't look at something nakedly, without conceptualizing it, and that causes problems in the head.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 11-19-2005, 10:13 PM
chezlaw chezlaw is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London, England
Posts: 58
Default Re: Morality and Evolution

[ QUOTE ]
But doesn't higher moral standards come from increased intelligence and a bigger brain? Like someone said previously, other pack animals also display some standards for acceptable and unacceptable behavior.

I also have questions about the role of "Intelligence and Evolution". It seems we are WAY over equipped in the intelligence department for what we need for the survival and perpetuation of our species.

[/ QUOTE ]
Brain size may also be an example of peacock's tale type runaway evolution.

One idea is that at some point we got hold of the idea that a favoured mate is one who displays creative talents (pictures, stories, etc) which then leads to a better and better ability to make such displays and hence a large brain.

chez
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.