The Evolution of Morality

Oncedeceived said:

How did the brain evolve and how did intelligence arise from mindless natural processes? If physical traits, those that would aid an organism to survive, how did a brain as an unplanned and unguided outcome develop as the "thinking" and processing organ it is?

Click to expand...

You should have been asking these questions when you were in school not now that you are an adult,
look it up for yourself, why do you always need other people to guide you? do it yourself,
if you want answers look them up, this generation are the luckiest there has ever been, we have the worlds libraries at our finger tips and search engines that can find out anything, you can read both sides of every argument for yourself.

Ginger123 said:

You should have been asking these questions when you were in school not now that you are an adult,
look it up for yourself, why do you always need other people to guide you? do it yourself,
if you want answers look them up, this generation are the luckiest there has ever been, we have the worlds libraries at our finger tips and search engines that can find out anything, you can read both sides of every argument for yourself.

Click to expand...

You look it up and you will find that there is no answer.

Oncedeceived said:

You look it up and you will find that there is no answer.

Click to expand...

Argument from ignorance fallacy. Even in the absence of naturalistic explanations, "God did it" has no explanatory power.

False dichotomy fallacy. "I see gaps in your worldview so mine must be right."

Still not making progress, OD?

Oncedeceived said:

You look it up and you will find that there is no answer.

Click to expand...

So that's how you get to 'God did it'.
I'm gobsmacked...

Once wrote:

I did totally miss this post! Sorry.

Click to expand...

No problem. From that post, it looks like we have exhausted some topics, agreed on others (from the end of that post -#270), and the main topic we'll get back to is about how morality can develop (below).

I am going to go back and look for the link that you gave me. I thought it was just to the book.

Click to expand...

I don't remember how many were direct links, and how many were links to pages that had more links. However, I did notice that the bibliography to the Moral Animal is available online, and that has pages and pages of references. Of course, many of those are not what you are looking for, but many are. If you really want to look into the extensive work that has been done, that's a list that will take you years to investigate.

To access that list, go to the link below, click on "index", then page up above the index, and you'll be in the bibliography.
The Moral Animal: Why We Are, the Way We Are: The New Science of Evolutionary Psychology: Robert Wright: 9780679763994: Amazon.com: Books

So we are disagreeing on one issue and that is whether or not evolution by naturalistic processes gave rise to morality. I say that these processes are not adequate to explain them on their own.

Click to expand...

Sigh. Yes. So I tried to summarize a 500 page book which itself was a summary of decades of research before, and that didn't work. Against my better judgement, I'll try again:

OK, first, imagine that intelligence evovles (I'll cover that more below). Now, in a species of intelligent creatures, I think we agree that hierarchies are expected to evolve (if you don't agree, we can cover that too, but I'm trying to save time). For instance, wolves, monkeys, lions, deer, and many other animals have a hierarchical structure - so I'm guessing you'll agree that's a likely situation.

Add to that the ability of the creatures to remember past interactions with each other. This is also common among many animals, including vampire bats, gazelles, dogs, and so on. It's a requirement to have a hierarchy, because otherwise it would not be remembered who was the alpha male, etc.

Now, as you know from daily life, situations arise often where helping someone helps them much more than it hurts you. For instance, giving some extra food to a starving person saves their life, yet cost you little (because you have a surplus), or releasing them from a trap/entanglement takes only a minute of your time, and saves their life, etc. So a brain structure that causes generosity will benefit yourself, because now and then the tables will be turned, and you'll receive a great benefit from someone you helped before. However, if someone always helps everyone, then they are taken advantage of even by those who themselves never help anyone.

This is structurally the same as the classic "prisoner's dilemma", and a lot of research has been done using computer programs to simulate societies of hundreds of individuals, and a mix of very different brain structures (responses) including those who always take advantage of others (while never helping), those who help everyone, those who only help those who have helped them (tit-for-tat), and a whole mix of other strategies (such as "random"). Then, the simulations allow the next generation based on those who have benefited the most (natural selection).

These simulations have shown repeatedly that tit-for-tat is a winning algorithm. Tit-for-tat is what one gets if mutations have structured the brain to respond according to a moral code, including a sense of fairness. It's the moral code we share with many other primates, including monkeys, as seen here: Fairness Experiment: Moral behaviour in Monkeys - YouTube

This is but one of many parts of the growing body of research on the evolution of morality, and that's about what I have time for now.

OK, trying to see what your objection here is....

Maybe it is that you don't see it possible for intelligence to delope gradually - "you either have it or you don't".

If so, then consider this. Intelligence, like so many other traits, is a gradual scale. A newborn is obviously doesn't have intelligence. It can't reason, think, consider, or anything. As time goes by, the intelligence develops gradually, and a 12 year old is obviously intelligent. (or, if you are going to claim a newborn is intelligent, then simply go back to a zygote, and that's clearly not intelligent.

Or maybe your objection is that intelligence is not an advantage for survival. However, a more intelligent creature is better at getting food and avoiding being food. You can see this in the advantage of a greater degree of intelligence in most given situations, such as, say, stalking a prey animal.

In either case, our earlier agreement - that God created mt. Vesuvius - even though we also agree that Mt. Vesuvius was made by natural geologic forces, gradually, often under the observation of people - may help here. In some ways, that is like the evolution of intelligence from a mammal like Eomaia to a dog, or from an animal like hylonomus to a parrot. In those cases, intelligence has clearly increased over time. Morality could be the same way - selected for due to it's demonstrated advantages for natural selection, and developing gradually - a naturalistic process that God is using to create.

Papias

biggles53 said:

There is quite simply a wealth of information available, outlining the evolution of the nervous systems of both invertebrates and vertebrates like us....

And, it's evolution is a similar pattern to ALL evolution.....many, many small changes over very long periods of time, filtered by the process of natural selection.....

And we have the EVIDENCE to support it.....

Click to expand...

All you have is similarities and a spotty fossil record.

Many small changes would give variety, not re-assembling whole new organs and body parts.

Ginger123 said:

So that's how you get to 'God did it'.
I'm gobsmacked...

Click to expand...

No that is how I get to...evolution is not satisfactory in explaining this.

biggles53 said:

There is quite simply a wealth of information available, outlining the evolution of the nervous systems of both invertebrates and vertebrates like us....

And, it's evolution is a similar pattern to ALL evolution.....many, many small changes over very long periods of time, filtered by the process of natural selection.....

And we have the EVIDENCE to support it.....

Click to expand...

By all means if there is evidence to support it, provide it.

biggles53 said:

You're kidding aren't you...?

One third of the ADULTS in Ireland believe in the existence of leprechauns...!

Click to expand...

Why do the Irish believe in leprechauns - Wiki Answers

wiki.answers.com › ... › Cryptids and Legendary Creatures › Leprechauns‎
The Irish do not believe in leprechauns. As a born and bred, true Dublin man, I can honestly say I've never met a person that 'believed' in them. In fact, I've never ...

An estimated 80% of the ADULTS in Iceland believe in the existence of fairies....!

Click to expand...

According to the Icelandic Tourist Board, about 10 percent of Icelanders believe in the existence of a "huldufólk" or a hidden world of elves, dwarfs and spirits with magic powers. Another 10 percent deny them, but the remaining 80 percent on the North Atlantic island nation either have no opinion or refuse to rule out their existence.[10] Magnús claims that while only 26% of Icelanders believe in elves, 80% "do take notice." [11] The more knowledgeable folklore scholars from the school can put their degree to use. Several organizations in Iceland either currently or have employed a full time folklore researcher to determine the impact of construction projects on hidden communities. Most notably, the public works department created this position for a time after a number of unexplained equipment malfunctions and injuries. Sources: Icelandic Elf School - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And those were 2 that I found on a 60 second search....I'm sure I can uncover more....!

Click to expand...

I was surprised I will admit that, that there were people although significantly lower percentages than what you claimed, do believe.

So this common theme of yours that it's "childish" to make a comparison between belief in gods and belief in other mythical beings just doesn't hold water...You might not like the fact, but ADULTS believe in a whole host (pun intended) of imaginary constructions........including gods...!

Click to expand...

I couldn't find one thing about any experiences with these imaginary constructs. For that many to "believe" it would seem there would be at least as much about experience of the believers and their fairies and leprachauns.

biggles53 said:

You forget about (deliberately..?) the filtering process of natural selection...for every change that takes place in the genetic make-up, those changes which enhance the organism's reproductive success will proliferate....at the expense of those which don't...

For example...the physical evolution of upright apes has been such that we are not particularly well disposed to survival based entirely upon that physical make-up.....we aren't very strong, nor are we especially fast, so relying solely upon 'flight or fight' would not serve us very well. So, there has been a specific selection advantage for us in the development of a bigger brain - we have used our wits and our ability to form complex social groups as a primary means of survival, rather than brute strength....

Click to expand...

Chimps are fairly small yet have tremendous strength. They split supposedly from the same line as we did. So are you saying that we didn't have strength after the split and if so why?

biggles53 said:

What....!!?? I thought the hallmark of a good 'person of faith' is that they hold their beliefs DESPITE the absence of evidence....!!

Are you trying to kid me....or yourself...?

Click to expand...

Biggles..... you can not knock the wall down faster than she can rebuild it, she is convinced that her life is an open book and that she is open to every argument there is, unfortunately for her she does not realise that she's trapped within the boundaries of her religion and there is no way she can pull free.
She is like a child who continually asks 'why' to every answer she is given.

She believes because it's what she wants to believe, it has nothing to do with real truth only her imagined truth.
The strange thing is, she would argue against other religions where people do exactly the same thing she is doing,
she either cant see or she won't see, either way she is not going to see anytime soon.

biggles53 said:

But, in case you didn't think that there are ADULTS who not only believe in those imaginary beings, but also "connect" with them........

Fairies and Little People - Sightings of Fairies and Little People

Click to expand...

I find the idea that you equate the sacred Hebrew texts of Israel's written history with fairies, leprechauns and santa clause, quite offensive and disrespectful.