Dogs have a sense of
right and wrong, which is more than
some people can say.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Sci-ku ™ -- haiku in the service of science!
Your Comments, Thoughts, Questions, Ideas
Anonymous says:
Lots of animals have a sense of altruism, down to the tiniest social insect. It probably helped them survive as a species. Any nineteenth-century biologist could tell you that.
And any twentieth-century biologist (or 21st, for that matter) could tell you that this theory has been invalidated. Social insects are basically "programmed" and react to chemical messages. Lower vertebrates, too, show no evidence of self consciousness, will, or empathy, all of which would be prerequisites for morality. Actions previously interpreted as altruistic are now understood as adaptive behaviors evolved through natural selection and performed by instinct, not volition.
Here's the definition of altruism from Webster's onlne dictionary. No where does it say that free will is required for altruism.
1 : unselfish regard for or devotion to the welfare of others
2 : behavior by an animal that is not beneficial to or may be harmful to itself but that benefits others of its species
To be unselfish, one must first have a sense of self, which most animals lack. "Regard" and "devotion" are acts of choice, and choice requires free will.
The definition in American Heritage is similar: "Concern for the welfare of others, as opposed to egoism; selflessness." Again, there is no demonstrated "ego" among the lower animals, nor the capability of having "concern."
Lots of animals have a sense of altruism, down to the tiniest social insect. It probably helped them survive as a species. Any nineteenth-century biologist could tell you that.
And any twentieth-century biologist (or 21st, for that matter) could tell you that this theory has been invalidated. Social insects are basically "programmed" and react to chemical messages. Lower vertebrates, too, show no evidence of self consciousness, will, or empathy, all of which would be prerequisites for morality. Actions previously interpreted as altruistic are now understood as adaptive behaviors evolved through natural selection and performed by instinct, not volition.
Just because a behavior is instinctive (part of an adaptive behavior) doesn't mean it isn't altruistic.
Yes, it does. Altruism requires free will.
Not buying it. What looks like free will could still be instinct.
That is exactly what I have been saying.
Here's the definition of altruism from Webster's onlne dictionary. No where does it say that free will is required for altruism.
1 : unselfish regard for or devotion to the welfare of others
2 : behavior by an animal that is not beneficial to or may be harmful to itself but that benefits others of its species
To be unselfish, one must first have a sense of self, which most animals lack. "Regard" and "devotion" are acts of choice, and choice requires free will.
The definition in American Heritage is similar: "Concern for the welfare of others, as opposed to egoism; selflessness." Again, there is no demonstrated "ego" among the lower animals, nor the capability of having "concern."
Post new comment