We see the issue of morality and evolution raised frequently on this forum. Usually it is in relationship to things like abortion and eugenics, most recently at
Message 50:
quote:
That said (and you have my permission to call me heartless), I don't want them to reproduce.
I'm not going to call you Heartless, for I see it in the exact same way.
What I want to discuss is how
individual behavior can be influenced by the concepts of evolution, in particular:
(1) evolution is the change in hereditary traits in a population from generation to generation.
(2) selection means that some individuals are better adapted to survive and breed than other individuals, but this is a relative scale.
(3) "success" - in evolutionary terms - is surviving and breeding as an initial condition, thus passing your hereditary traits to the next generation.
(4) long term success - in evolutionary terms - is ensuring the continued survival and breeding of your lineage, ensuring that your hereditary traits
remain part of the population.
Given that an individual that concentrates on (3) and ignores (4) could be less successful
in the long run than an individual that gives attention to (4) at the expense of some commitment to (3), it seems to me that certain behaviors that promote the long term survival of offspring (or of other relatives with shared hereditary traits) would be a selective advantage for those individuals, and would form a logical basis for "moral" behavior.
{ ... opens floodgates ... }
Enjoy.
Note: I want to
exclude entirely the concept of "survival of the fittest" from this discussion, as it is missing the relevance of the survival of the barely able. Nor do I want to discuss eugenics or abortion, but to concentrate on the effect of (4) on behavior.
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •
™ Version 4.2