Do we humans disprove evolution?

[keith99]

Perhaps you should get a dictionary and look up the word conscience. It has nothing to do with empathy or their misguided concept of humanity.

I share a house with a dog owner. I dislike dogs. The dog knows my room is off limits but that does not stop him coming in at times. He is a greedy scavenger, like all dogs. He will steal food without compunction. The owner compounds the problem by not training the dog to eat from its food bowl only.

Sure, dogs are loyal. They are dirty, noisy, clumsy, excessively friendly and will eat anything. Somewhat like tipsy teenage boys. That is not conscience. That's instinct and thousands of years of human socialisation and breeding.

All the negative things you mention are found in greater measure in humans.

My pair would not steal food. They decided on their own what was fair game. I could leave a steak on the counter and it would be safe. But they felt anything on hte floor was legally theirs.

And while rare I did occasionally come home to be dogs with their heads down and tail between their legs because they had done something wrong. Unlike most humans it seems their consciences were troubling them.

Dogs have all the actions of having a conscience. Your position seems to be that humans and humans alone are defined as having a conscience and any evidence to the contrary is to be ignored because other animals do not ahve a conscience.

 

[Astrid]

I understand what you are saying. The human infant is vulnerable to predators for up to a decade. How many other species have offspring that are so vulnerable, and for so long. Human infants don't have speed, claws, teeth, or camouflage. They can't climb or swim.

A human infant has to be carried by hand for an extended period of time. A human infant can't hear approaching predators or even smell any predators. We don't have fur so we cannot endure cold climates. We need to live in villages with walls, if we want to survive.

But the ancestors of humans lived in the tropics.
Clothing became possible. / necessary later, when
people moved into colder areas.

A lot of animals cannot long live outside their mutually
supportive group.
A group of humans or pre human ancestors without the
fangs to drive away a hyena would certainly know how to
pelt them with stones.
A lone human would be easy prey.
Made sure that only the sociable sorts survived!

The length of time from birth to maturity is a difference
in amount, not of kind.

Villages and walls? Some basic anthropology would soon
show thats far from universal. Those are mainly for defense..
against other people.

 

[Astrid]

There is no thing as disproving Evolution because Evolution is just an theory -often means an untested hunch, or a guess without supporting evidence

Nobody ever proven anything about it or any missing link for over 160 years.
People think that if they stop saying Theory of Evolution and say only Evolution it will somehow get accepted as fact

Come now. The exact nature of a theory is opposite to
your unsupported guess.

No theory will ever be proved regardless of whether its true.
It can be disproved. Proof requires having all possible
data, obviously impossible to do.

A SCIENTIFIC theory is an explanation for a
set of facts. Ties it all together.

Like the prosecution theory of how all the
facts show Joe robbed the store in Chicago.

Like a scientific theory, it can be disproved by a
contrary fact.

Joe proves he was having crumpets with the Queen
in London at the time.

Once he has done that, the theory that he did it
is gone, disproved, invalid, moot and discarded.

The theory of evolutiin is supported by an
enormous body of data. No contrary data
(Tea with Queen etc) has ever been found. Zero.

It is perfectly ok to disbelieve the theory of
evolution, or as its sometimes less precisely
called, "evolution".

Its not so sensible to disbelieve for reasons only guessed
at.
Note that I am notsaying ToE is true or a fact, just that
the objections cited don't apply to ANY scientific theory.


If I said I dont believe in God coz its just a hunch
and nobody has found the cross after 2000
years, that would not be sensible. Invalid onjections.

Personally, I feel that reasons for a decision or
belief are best based on more than my hunch
or lack of any knowledge of the subject.

Mileage may vary.

 

[loveofourlord]

The differences between animal species are basically physical. Humans are superficially similar in that they are flesh and blood. What makes man different is the spiritual dimension. Man has a conscience. There is no way that could just evolve. Man is God conscious. Evolution cannot explain that. Man is creative in ways that no animal is. That is an aspect of God's image. It's not something that just evolves.

Everything humans have appear in nature just at smaller levels, how do you know animals don't have conscious? They understand right and wrong, just to a lesser degree. Other apes understand fairness and such.

 

[loveofourlord]

There is no thing as disproving Evolution because Evolution is just an theory -often means an untested hunch, or a guess without supporting evidence

Nobody ever proven anything about it or any missing link for over 160 years.
People think that if they stop saying Theory of Evolution and say only Evolution it will somehow get accepted as fact

man not seen that pratt in years, quiet cute. Might want to look up the definition of scientific theory.

 

[dlamberth]

The differences between animal species are basically physical. Humans are superficially similar in that they are flesh and blood. What makes man different is the spiritual dimension. Man has a conscience. There is no way that could just evolve. Man is God conscious. Evolution cannot explain that. Man is creative in ways that no animal is. That is an aspect of God's image. It's not something that just evolves.

All life forms have consciousness of some sort. Our consciousness is Human consciousness. Our evolution track is to become a more human, Human Being.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Conscience could evolve naturally through group behaviour. Group behaviour is a major evolutionary tool employed by many animals. Conscience could also be a learned behaviour. I don't find conscience any more inexplicable than learning to keep your hand out of the fire. I suspect it's a combination of instinct and learning.

The jury is still out on whether animals have something we could reasonably define as conscience. There's a similar problem with human babies.

5 Animals With a Moral Compass | Animal Emotions | Live Science
Do Animas Know Right From Wrong? | Live Science
OB

Conscience is a function of socialisation, the internalisation of social rules and mores to establish a moral compass. It needs some self-awareness and, probably some theory of mind, i.e. awareness of and concern about what others might think. Some of our fellow primates show clear signs of being aware of transgressing social rules and shame or repentance when discovered in the breach; this suggests the rudiments of conscience.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Humans are a physically weak species. Chimpanzees are three times stronger than us.

Myth. Chimps are not as strong as we thought they were:

"... when it comes to pulling and jumping, chimps are about 1.5 times as strong as humans relative to their body mass. But because they are lighter than the average person, humans can actually outperform them in absolute terms..."
​

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I see instinct as a repeating pattern of behavior, that is triggered by an event. I do not associate emotions with instinct.

Emotions are hard-wired patterns of physiological responses to certain types of stimuli - if anything is instinctive in humans, it's emotions. They can be conditioned, but you only need to look at an infant to see them in their unconditioned instinctual form.

Most of our behaviour, reasoned or otherwise, is driven by the feelings emotions invoke.

 

[Shemjaza]

Do you know what a conscience is? From your question, obviously not. People know that some things are right and some things are wrong. Animals do not. Conscience is what alerts people to wrong actions. It's what stops people from killing even if they would like to. It is so strong that most soldiers have to be trained to ignore conscience in order to kill the enemy. I'm ex military, I have some idea of what I'm talking about. Lions don't need that sort of training. Neither do dogs or cats. If your dog gets loose in a flock of sheep, it will kill without compunction. Cats kill for fun. I love cats, but I'm a realist. Mine stays inside. We have magnificent rainbow lorikeets, that are a delight to see. I see beauty, the cat sees lunch.

Humans have to be socialised to have the kind of responses you describe. Without the appropriate upbringing children don't learn to be caring and careful.

It isn't a yes/no thing, there's considerable variation among individuals and species. Cats are naturally solitary predators... it's not surprising that they have less empathy than humans or dogs.

Thinking of your lorikeets, have you ever seen a lamb or a calf? They're adorable... they are also delicious. I doubt you'd consider farmers conditioned killers like elite soldiers, just regular people with a different upbringing.

My point is that humans and animals both have the potential for empathy and some form of morality, and while humans are clearly both smarter and more complicated in their moral landscape, I haven't seen evidence for a fundamental qualitative difference.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I share a house with a dog owner. I dislike dogs. The dog knows my room is off limits but that does not stop him coming in at times. He is a greedy scavenger, like all dogs. He will steal food without compunction. The owner compounds the problem by not training the dog to eat from its food bowl only.

If a dog has not been trained to regard an action as wrong, it's unlikely to have a pang of conscience about it.

But it's worth noting that other consciences may conflict with your own, and that people (and animals) often act contrary to their consciences - hence regret, shame, embarrassment, etc.

Dogs may learn some rules from a human companion, but that learned understanding is easily swamped by more instinctive behaviours. When they live in packs, the rules of the social structure are more natural to them and correspondingly stronger.

 

[klutedavid]

Myth. Chimps are not as strong as we thought they were:

"... when it comes to pulling and jumping, chimps are about 1.5 times as strong as humans relative to their body mass. But because they are lighter than the average person, humans can actually outperform them in absolute terms..."
​

Good point. Yet they are smaller than us but much stronger still. Same goes for most of the animal kingdom.

Sled dogs have been known to travel over 90 mi (145 km) in a 24 hour period while pulling 85 lb (39 kg) each. By the way, the dogs are not walking.

 

[klutedavid]

Emotions are hard-wired patterns of physiological responses to certain types of stimuli - if anything is instinctive in humans, it's emotions. They can be conditioned, but you only need to look at an infant to see them in their unconditioned instinctual form.

Most of our behaviour, reasoned or otherwise, is driven by the feelings emotions invoke.

Is the love of others, hard wired into human behavior?

 

[AV1611VET]

Do we humans disprove evolution?

No.

I'm convinced that disproving evolution is a task reserved for Jesus Christ, when He comes back and sets up His millennial kingdom.

In the meantime, evolution will wax stronger and stronger, until it culminates in the Tribulation period, when the Antichrist will demonstrate abiogenesis.

Revelation 13:15 And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Is the love of others, hard wired into human behavior?

Yes, of course, care for kin is commonplace among mammals, and cooperative and altruistic behaviour is widespread among social animals. These behaviours are conditioned by circumstances and in-group or out-group identification. They have been studied in considerable detail, and the evolutionary advantages are fairly well understood.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Sled dogs have been known to travel over 90 mi (145 km) in a 24 hour period while pulling 85 lb (39 kg) each. By the way, the dogs are not walking.

Many, if not most, species have some specialisation for their particular niches. Human specialisations involve endurance running and cognitive & behavioural flexibility.

 

[Nithavela]

We are not driven by instinct like every other species. We constantly choose and think about every action we take, every day.

You make about a dozen real decisions per day, tops. The rest of the time, you're on autopilot.

 

[klutedavid]

Yes, of course, care for kin is commonplace among mammals, and cooperative and altruistic behaviour is widespread among social animals. These behaviours are conditioned by circumstances and in-group or out-group identification. They have been studied in considerable detail, and the evolutionary advantages are fairly well understood.

How come the human race does not display these traits?

All I see is obsessional self interest, only for a profit, I'm busy, look at me. As long as your nice to me, then I will be nice to you. Conditional love only when there is a return on that love.

I thought that humanity has a very dark side which is riddled through human history.

I cannot see a love for others, as being an evident trait in human behavior.

There seems to be a blindness to the true reality of our human nature.

 

[klutedavid]

You make about a dozen real decisions per day, tops. The rest of the time, you're on autopilot.

How many decisions do cats and dogs make each day?

I had a cat and I never regarded that cat as domesticated. It was always a wild beast. It would leave after sunset, fight and kill throughout the night. It would return in the morning, bits of fur missing. Sometimes it would return with a dead rat or bird.

That cat demanded to be fed in the morning and then slept all day.

That cat was 100% driven by instinct.

 

[Nithavela]

That cat was 100% driven by instinct.

If it makes you feel better about yourself, you can live your life thinking you're logical and every non-human is instinct-driven.