Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,818 Year: 3,075/9,624 Month: 920/1,588 Week: 103/223 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What morality can be logically derived from Evolution?
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5033 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 25 of 32 (491255)
12-12-2008 9:39 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by PaulK
12-12-2008 1:44 AM


Re: population, ethics and morality
quote:
PaulK
Most important of all there is a big difference between using evolutionary principles to predict or explain elements of morality and actually using evolution to prescribe morality.
RAZD
Agreed. There is also the problem of post hoc fallacy to ascribe behavior to moral systems that are actually part of hereditary or derived behavior.
I am still going to go with PaulK on this RAZD. It seems you (RAZD) are addressing a meta issue before we know what that is, possible behavior on top of behavior no matter the nature of genic selection etc. Mayr however seems to agree more with you than say PaulK or me.
Mayr said, (Why Biology is Unique page 146)"if, owing to the interaction of the composing individuals or owing to a division of labor or other social actions, the fitness of a group is higher or lower than the arithmetic mean of the fitness values of the composing individuals, then the group as a whole can serve as an object of selection. I call this hard group selection. Interestingly, this was already appreciated by Darwin in a discussion of groups of primative humans (Darwin 1871). Such hard group selection, a prerequisite for the explanantion of human ethics, is still controversial (Sober and Wilson 1998)."
I am somewhat certain however, that Mayr's analysis would have to preclude sense being made of Wright's,1931 -"The less the variation of gene frequency about its mean value, the closer the approach to an adaptive orthogensis" in the same distribtion curve shape underlying the details of any behavior from evolution etc.
It seems to preclude my own idea
http://aexion.org/evopoise.aspx
that Gladyshev's macrothermodynamics can inform the turning curve of Wright's non-Eimerian orthogenesis. Instead we have the notion of facilitated variation. I addrss this outside of the body in space here:
http://axiompanbiog.com/content1.aspx
These details (difference of Eimer's use of morphophysis and organophysis) however could show that no moral beyond ethical system could arise (in the same conversation about evolutionary pricincples vs prescribed morality via ethics(Orthogensis is the domain of internal drives (innate,ethical,moral,etc) to biological change)) except in the human, as per as you say PaulK.
Edited by Brad McFall, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by PaulK, posted 12-12-2008 1:44 AM PaulK 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