Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,423 Year: 3,680/9,624 Month: 551/974 Week: 164/276 Day: 4/34 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   An Evolutionary Basis for Ethics?
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2514 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 5 of 57 (540080)
12-22-2009 1:14 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Dr Adequate
12-22-2009 12:35 AM


What happened? The monkeys that were still being rewarded with cucumber refused to collect any more pebbles. There is something peculiarly human about this reaction and the concept of justice it suggests. Mere conditioning, as with Skinner's pigeons, comes nowhere near explaining this.
The key thing to highlight here is from an evolutionary cost benefit analysis it doesn't make sense for them to stop. They are doing a task and getting food. Getting food (of any quality) is an advantage. Stopping the task and therefore getting no food rather than get 2nd place food is not evolutionarily beneficial.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-22-2009 12:35 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by jasonlang, posted 01-03-2010 9:09 AM Nuggin has replied

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2514 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 36 of 57 (540713)
12-28-2009 1:47 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by ATheist
12-27-2009 11:56 AM


Atheism/Evolution
I know atheism has no concrete relation to evolution, but there is a remarkable correlation between atheism and an undying fealty towards evolution. So, with that said, I imagine that trend will continue with whomever I speak with in the biology department.
While people who believe in evolution don't necessarily have to be atheists, it's hard to imagine a rational atheist who doesn't accept evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by ATheist, posted 12-27-2009 11:56 AM ATheist has not replied

  
Nuggin
Member (Idle past 2514 days)
Posts: 2965
From: Los Angeles, CA USA
Joined: 08-09-2005


Message 52 of 57 (541421)
01-03-2010 12:56 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by jasonlang
01-03-2010 9:09 AM


Maybe it doesn't make sense in the short term, looking at energy in-energy out, but perhaps a sense of fairness i.e. getting your "fair share" has long term evolutionary benefits for a social animal, i.e. those who've settled for second best have had less offspring overall. In a longer study, though, they might have caved if the cucumber was the only sustenance on offer.
I agree. I'm just pointing out that it really does highlight the idea of "fairness" with in their head.
Without fairness as a concept, it's simple: do task, get food.
With fairness are seeing what other animals are getting, expecting the same, not getting it and realizing that they are getting the short end of the stick

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by jasonlang, posted 01-03-2010 9:09 AM jasonlang has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024