Morality and Ethics

[hortysir]

The genetic need to preserve the species is absolute in nature. In humans it envolved into the protection of women and children and later tribes. You might call it the evolution of "morality".

See what I mean, Doc?

 

[AVG-JOE]

The instiinct for survival can rationally be a factor in natural selection.

But I don't see how evolution played a part in the items on my list. I am open to be convinced that i'm wrong about that.

Let's start with love. Suppose a man and a woman have baby, say 20,000 years ago. What are the odds of that baby surviving with no love shown to it. If the parents' love for their child does not exceed they instinct for self preservation, the kid is not as likely to make it to adulthood and keep the genetic line going. One might postulate that without love the human species might not have made it out of the trees.

And yet baby turtles and numerous other reptiles and all species of fish, if they survive the environment they are born into, survive quite handily without their parents giving them a second thought. Except for humans, mammals separated from their young quickly forget about them and won't recognize them or care about them after a lengthy separation.

Nor is there any evidence or clue that any species other than human gives a flying fig about any other species or even their own species that they don't interact with.

I think that 'love' as a component of survival, as well as the other things on my list, have to be considered as more likely not part of the process of random natural selection.

You've never had a dog or cat for a friend, have you? Treat them right and they're devoted companionship is 'till death do you part.

In spite of that, humanity evolved a bit more complex social structure because we're a bit more complex animal. Makes perfect evolutionary sense to me.

 

[AVG-JOE]

when a baby is born...the mother releases hormones that cause her to 'bond' with the child

that begins the emotion of protection or love...a physical hormone becomes the beginning of emotions...

humans are built for survival...simple as that

True. Which makes us likely to survive as individuals. Step one.

Incredible success as individuals has allowed evolution to start tweaking the herd with tools like imagination, laughter and complex social organization.

Step two gives us a fighting chance as a species.

 

[AVG-JOE]

okay first man...primitive..did not have the time to ponder morality due to the harsh conditions that required a continual struggle just to survive..morality and ethics are developed as people have the luxury of having extra time and are having an easier time surviving

Sounds more like learned behavior, or training, rather than evolution

what is evolution but learned behavior being given from one generation to another

The ability to 'learn' is a very successful trait that's likely to be passed along through time. Ask any dog that's stepped onto black-top in August.

 

[Foxfyre]

Sounds more like learned behavior, or training, rather than evolution

what is evolution but learned behavior being given from one generation to another

The ability to 'learn' is a very successful trait that's likely to be passed along through time. Ask any dog that's stepped onto black-top in August.

And yet a dog cannot communicate to another dog the consequences of stepping onto black-top in August. Each dog has to learn that from its own experience.

Humankind alone seems to be capable of learning from the communicated experience of others. Doesn't it at least give pause for thought of why humans, of all species on Earth, are alone in being able to communicate via rational concept? Many different species have learned to fly, swim, dig, run fast, hunt, avoid predators, etc. How does one explain the incredible capabilities of the human brain via evolution alone?

It seems to me that the evidence in sheer probability observed in evolution would suggest that other species would evolve perhaps somewhat differently, but with comparable or similar abilities. But none did. Why?

 

[AVG-JOE]

what is evolution but learned behavior being given from one generation to another

The ability to 'learn' is a very successful trait that's likely to be passed along through time. Ask any dog that's stepped onto black-top in August.

And yet a dog cannot communicate to another dog the consequences of stepping onto black-top in August. Each dog has to learn that from its own experience.

Humankind alone seems to be capable of learning from the communicated experience of others. Doesn't it at least give pause for thought of why humans, of all species on Earth, are alone in being able to communicate via rational concept? Many different species have learned to fly, swim, dig, run fast, hunt, avoid predators, etc. How does one explain the incredible capabilities of the human brain via evolution alone?

It seems to me that the evidence in sheer probability observed in evolution would suggest that other species would evolve perhaps somewhat differently, but with comparable or similar abilities. But none did. Why?

Couldn't agree more. Humans evolved differently from dogs. And yet both still make awesome friends and frightening enemies - just different. Probably 'cause we're more closely related to dogs than we are to butterflies.

For me, evolution explains the complexity of life as well as the fact of it simply because I believe it does. Everyone believes we got here somehow.... Faith rocks, eh?

 

[Flagwavrusa]

what is evolution but learned behavior being given from one generation to another

The ability to 'learn' is a very successful trait that's likely to be passed along through time. Ask any dog that's stepped onto black-top in August.

And yet a dog cannot communicate to another dog the consequences of stepping onto black-top in August. Each dog has to learn that from its own experience.

Humankind alone seems to be capable of learning from the communicated experience of others. Doesn't it at least give pause for thought of why humans, of all species on Earth, are alone in being able to communicate via rational concept? Many different species have learned to fly, swim, dig, run fast, hunt, avoid predators, etc. How does one explain the incredible capabilities of the human brain via evolution alone?

It seems to me that the evidence in sheer probability observed in evolution would suggest that other species would evolve perhaps somewhat differently, but with comparable or similar abilities. But none did. Why?

The same reason cheetahs became really fast, and elephants really big. Once a species starts down an evolutionary path a certain traits get emphasized, for man that was increasing brain size.

I don't think you have to call into play outside intervention. While we marvel at our relatively remarkable intelligence compared to other species, its really just another survival trait i e the ability to adapt to the environment with our creativity rather than sharp fangs or keen senses.

Probably once we got to the level of homo erectus there would have been no need to evolve further intelligence. Homo erectus survived just fine for almost 2 million years so we had enough intelligence at that point to outwit any other animal species. The thing that made our species smarter was competition against each other, rival groups of homonids vying for territory or sexual partners. The ones with higher iq were victorious and passed on their genes, and every generation getting smarter.