The Spam Thread: Channel Your Need to Spam Here Only

[jwb]

Originally Posted by Lucem Ferre

When I say evolved I don't mean in a genetic sense, I mean how our understanding of morality has developed. I don't think morality is genetic, I think it's a product of varying things that are genetic that I can't pin point because I'm not a neurologist. I think time has given us the ability to analyze ourselves and gain a better understanding of morality just like it has in many different things.

it arises as a function of human society (i.e. the tribe) and is based largely on the genetic mechanisms I spoke of.

The extent to which it is variable is the extent to which different human societies sieze in the same instincts to enforce different rules.

[jwb]

There is a lot of evidence for it. In fact, if you believe in evolution, it's really hard to explain how some mechanism for regulating human behavior which always serves the good of a given society and is present in every human society on Earth would not have some basic evolutionary explanation. It's just yet another arena where science makes is uncomfortable when it hits too close to home.

[jwb]

Originally Posted by elphenor

what's this evidence?

does our morality really always serve the good of society, what's the criteria for that?

can we even agree on what's moral?

I'm not seeing humans as naturally very utilitarian either

what serves society first and foremost is having a common moral framework by which you can regulate the members of said society

Society A and society B might have different specific morals, but the purpose those morals serve are much more identical.

E.g. I remember a study from years back about how they determined that certain neural activity resembled someone pondering a moral question vs a strictly logical question.

And they asked a group of people about stoning a woman for adultery, some of whom were Western and some of whom were middle Eastern. The people answered the question predictably, of course. The striking thing was that in both the Western and middle Eastern patients, the same neural patterns manifested. The Westerners were disgusted at the murder a woman, the middle easterners week disgusted at her betrayal of her husband. Both were following the same instincts, though informed by different cultures so they came to very different conclusions.

[jwb]

Originally Posted by elphenor

the idea that human behavior can all be attributed to natural selection in our tribal days is reductionist and no longer unchallenged since the 20th century

the more universal* something is in our species the more likely it has been influenced by our evolution. Especially when there's a clear pragmatic role for it to play.

* By universal I mean that all human societies have morality, not that all morality is the same.

[Lucem Ferre]

Originally Posted by jwb

what serves society first and foremost is having a common moral framework by which you can regulate the members of said society

Society A and society B might have different specific morals, but the purpose those morals serve are much more identical.

E.g. I remember a study from years back about how they determined that certain neural activity resembled someone pondering a moral question vs a strictly logical question.

And they asked a group of people about stoning a woman for adultery, some of whom were Western and some of whom were middle Eastern. The people answered the question predictably, of course. The striking thing was that in both the Western and middle Eastern patients, the same neural patterns manifested. The Westerners were disgusted at the murder a woman, the middle easterners week disgusted at her betrayal of her husband. Both were following the same instincts, though informed by different cultures so they came to very different conclusions.

Can you link it or find it?

Edit: I found this interesting article though. http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/mi...ality-iacoboni

[jwb]

I'm trying to but having a hard time finding it. It was years ago I read this particular piece.

[Lucem Ferre]

Originally Posted by jwb

I'm trying to but having a hard time finding it. It was years ago I read this particular piece.

I hate it when that happens.

[jwb]

Originally Posted by elphenor

I'm not dosagreeing that the capacity for forming morality is inherent, but the rules will vary culture to culture

in this way it is like language

but that still means that both language and morality have a biological basis and purpose

I was never saying that we are evolved for a specific set of moral rules any more then we are evolved to speak a specific language. The adaptability of these tools is part of what makes them functional.

[Mindy]

[Plankton]

Don't tell me what to do... lol


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6c7NGPD9ViE