You seem to have forgotten we are programmed to care for others
You are positing that man is instinctually empathetic - I assume you are not arguing that there is a "programmer" :). I agree that empathy seems to be an instinctual response, but I don't think that we can conclude empathic instinct prevents harming others. Studies regarding empathy illustrate that the automatic concern for another only extends to those who are of same tribal or blood relations. To extend empathic concern towards those outside of our tribe or blood requires cognitive/intellectual reflection. From the perspective of evolutionary theory, empathic concern for those outside one's tribe is hinderance for gene propagation.
From purely intellectual perspective, if morality derives from instinctual impulse, that is propagation of the gene pool, then I would argue that liquidation of the infirm and the genetically inferior untermenschen would be a moral imperative.
I tend to think, that just as we see in the second law of thermodynamics entropy (disorder) will increase over time, yet we also see that ordered systems self-organize out of chaos (the galaxies, stars, planets, animals, plants, DNA etc.); then to think that human intellect, morality, ethics and so forth do not naturally occur out of the action of the universe, is somewhat over-stating humanities free will and self determination.
No, Im not talking about any kind of intelligent programmer, but we have morals and ethics that go beyond the scope of our immediate social circle, because that is ultimately best for humanities aggregate gene pool. Some people took a step back at some points and though to themselves 'if only we stopped killing each other continuously, we might actually get somewhere'. This isnt a human triumph over our innate empathy purely for your own gene pool, its a self-organizing certainty-of-chance, given the conditions of human development and enough time.
Ultimately we cant know for sure, but given all the information I have seen, this to me seems like the most plausible course of events. This is why its critical we arent held back by 2,000 year old thinking, because that thinking wont stop that asteroid that is going to extinct us, only humanity working as a unified force can acheive that.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I read that the self-organizing orderly systems do not violate the Second Law of Thermodynamics because the seeming decrease in disorder of the localize system arises at the expense of increasing disorder of the general system. If we are subject to this immutable law without any other recourse, then continual wars strife, and conflict are a certainty of our impersonal universe; any attempt to counter such natural impulse would be futile.
If morality is instinct, then the term "morality" need to be jettisoned, as it obfuscates discussion. Instinct serves to propagate the DNA of the creature, then the tribe, in that priority. A tendency or sentiment that fosters species level propagation at the expense of the creature's or tribe's DNA propagation is not instinctual, and thus, "immoral" (if there can be such term). From the logical framework you have provided, the instinctual imperative is to place the self and his tribe above all else.
Man's fate would be no different, whether he is from a world 2000 years past or current, since his perceptual matrix would be instinctually driven. In fact, wouldn't the set of instinctual imperatives be more aligned with man 2000 years past, than the modern man, who clouded by technological smog to imagine himself above the immutable instinct of his DNA?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
We seem to be in a loop. You want to prove morals come from heaven and hell; I argue morals need not come from any absolute external authority and can self organize through the action of intellectual self preservation instinct of humanity.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
No one has ever changed their beliefs because he read some pithy "proof" on a web post. I am trying to understand your logic better. You are proposing that the self-preservation instinct allows for a social matrix of universal empathy towards the weaker and the inferior. My observations and application of your assumptions do not lead to such society.
Observe any living group in action: lions will kill other lions not belonging to their pride, oak trees will kill off any seedling that is invades its territory, omegas and gammas in a wolf pack do not reproduce, male bears will kill any bear cubs that wander into its view, etc. If your conclusion is that the tribal separation and intraspecies wars are our given fate, then I absolutely concur with that conclusion. If you are advocating the liquidation of the infirm, sick, and the genetically inferior, then based on your premise, I concur with that conclusion.
From your premise, I cannot deductively arrive at some hippy free-love for all society based solely on survival instinct, no matter how intelligent the animal may be.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit