Hi again Bolder-dash.
And you feel this sense of empathy arises from where? If a tree doesn't have it, why do you?
It was simply a mutation that held selective advantages? But it doesn't hold a selective advantage for frogs.
Trees and frogs are not social animals. We do see similar behavior in social animals, especially in other primates that share our common ancestry, even monkeys:
Monkeys Show Sense Of Fairness, Study Saysquote:
Researchers studying brown capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) have found that the highly social, cooperative species native to South America show a sense of fairness, ...
The question of whether human aversion to unfair treatmentnow shown by other primatesis an evolved behavior or the result of the cultural influence of large social institutions like religion, governments, and schools, in the case of humans, has intrigued scientists in recent years.
The new finding suggests evolution may have something to do with it. It also highlights questions about the economic and evolutionary nature of cooperation and its relationship to a species' sense of fairness, while adding yet another chapter to our understanding of primates.
"It looks like this behavior is evolved it is not simply a cultural construct. There's some good evolutionary reason why we don't like being treated unfairly," said Sarah Brosnan, lead author of the study to be published in tomorrow's issue of the science journal Nature
We also see common moral and ethic beliefs in widely diverse cultures - almost every culture known to man has some variation on the "golden rule," in part because (as Rahvin points out) this is
enlightened self-interest: it benefits the society and the society in turn benefits us.
Message 62: If one is truly atheist, why should you have any morality? Why not just do what is best for yourself, and those you love, and the heck with any others?
Curiously, if moral behavior really were dependent on religious beliefs, then one would expect to find a
significant, large difference in the proportion of the religious people in prison compared to the general population. This just is not true, for the proportions are virtually the same (with slightly fewer atheists and agnostics, but not outside the margin of error for the small sample size in prison). This holds for repeat offenders as well, so don't start thinking that new prisoners convert. The fact is that there is no significant correlation between religious beliefs and breaking the law/s of a country.
Page Not Found - HolySmoke!
quote:
Judeo-Christian Total 62594 83.761% (of the 74731 total responses)
Which is comparable to the general USA population:
Religion in the United States - Wikipedia
quote:
According to a 2007 Pew Research Center survey,[9] the following is the order of religious preferences in the United States:
• Christianity: (78.5%)
There is a difference of 5% (higher in prison than out) in the
reported numbers. If anything, it appears that "Judeo-Christian" people are
slightly more likely to be in prison than other people (including atheists, agnostics, and people of other religions). This is within the margin of error for comparing these stats from different sources.
Is it just a practical consideration, that by being moral in your own mind, maybe its harder to get in trouble, legal or otherwise.
What we consistently see is that moral are defined by the culture and the practical considerations of people living together in a community.
Start with the golden rule as enlightened self-interest, and you can derive a basic set of moral ethics that is not significantly different from what you see in society.
And we see the golden rule in the behavior of capuchin monkeys, above, and in other primates:
Monkeys have a sense of morality, say scientists:
quote:
MONKEYS and apes have a sense of morality and the rudimentary ability to tell right from wrong, according to new research.
In a series of studies scientists have found that monkeys and apes can make judgments about fairness, offer altruistic help and empathise when a fellow animal is ill or in difficulties. They even appear to have consciences and the ability to remember obligations.
The research implies that morality is not a uniquely human quality and suggests it arose through evolution. That could mean the strength of our consciences is partly determined by our genes.
As a deist, I do not believe that any moral commandments come from god/s, but rather that we are left to our own devices. It is up to us to determine what we conclude, through logic and reason, would be a model for interactive social behavior, in a society where we would like to live -- starting with "do unto others as we would like to have others do unto us" as the basic precept.
I don't see the moral ethical issue being any different for atheists: just because they reject belief in god/s does not mean that they are not caring, social, rational and law-abiding people, or that caring, social, rational and law-abiding people are not moral, regardless of beliefs.
Regarding the topic, this shows that the issue of morality and ethics is not a problem with being an atheist (or evolutionist (or deist)), but one in defining what we would consider an ideal social framework.
So we should return to letting our atheist friends complain about the burden/s they bear.
Enjoy.
Edited by RAZD, : topic link
™ Version 4.2
(1)