Karma reasons for concrete message

Message

Boots



    Posts: 1299
  • Darwins +96/-0

My point is and sorry for the length, how does a love like that come about by accident, or however you want to put that? I don't understand how evolution can explain that, it goes against all of evolution, because of such deep love. I believe that it because of the fact that you don't have to believe in God to have morals and know every life is worthy of value, that shows there has to be some transcending absolute that has instilled it within all of us. So I ask if you can really give me a rational explanation of where these came from, how there truly are things that are absolutely wrong whether or not someone agrees with it like murder, rape, and things of that nature.

Samuelke, it's actually quite simple to explain via evolution--even though I'm really not qualified to do so; perhaps someone else who is more qualified than me can correct my mistakes.

Evolution's main "goal" (if you can call it that) is NOT repeat NOT the "survival of the individual."  It is the survival of the GENE.  The species.  That's why sex feels so good--evolution made it that way to insure procreation occurs.  Your example above (the parents saving the palsy child) is nothing more than good 'ol parental instinct.  You show me any parent who wouldn't walk through fire for their kid, I"ll show you a phu ktup parent (I know, I'm a parent too).  And I'm not talking about human parents only--ANY animal that has the maternal instinct (most mammals, I believe, and there probably are others) will risk their lives for their offspring.  Ever hear the stories of the mama cat that runs into a burning building repeatedly to save her litter?  Exactly the same thing.

There are documented examples aplenty of cooperation, self-sacrifice, sharing, and other "moral" behavior in the animal world.  Go look for it.

As far as "deep love," may I hypothesize that the combination of a mammal's parental instinct, plus our evolved language that allows us to label and think about abstract things, leads to philosophical topics such as "morals' and "love," and that's all there is to it?  As soon as you get a robust language, you can contemplate things that you can't see.  It's not such a leap to understand that concepts like "love" will evolve naturally from having a robust language, which is simply a product of evolution.

As far as "universal" moral truths--meh.  Too much of a philosophical hotbed and I'm NOT equipped to handle that one.  However, I will point out that morals change with the times--even the most cursory study of history reveals that.

I'd like to point out that your saying "I don't understand how this could be true" is a textbook example of the logical fallacy of "argument from ignorance."  You don't know something, so you reject a belief in it, and you're willing to offer an unprovable assertion that fits your current beliefs/world view ("goddidit") to quell the cognative dissonance, rather than actually go learn about the topic.

Finally, you REALLY need to answer Anfauglir.  REALLY.

Edited: a few spelling mistakes and formatting, and clarified a couple things
Changed Change Reason Date
wright excellent point: linking language and morality September 03, 2012, 02:01:38 PM