"Super Science Headache Time" or "A Question About Morality And Emotions" - Page 2

Seil · 01-24-2012, 04:08 AM

So I want to study four things: sociology, philosophy, biology and theology. Why? Because I've finally figured out how to phrase... some sort of question:

From a purely biological viewpoint, a predator is right to defend its most recent kill, claiming the food for itself and its young. However, this is seen in todays society as a faux pas, refusing someone because of apparent selfishness or greed. The greed and selfishness bits we would attribute to a antagonist theological figure, or as a part of ourselves that should be controlled or expunged.

At the opposite end of the spectrum, there's the man who shares everything he's got. Societally philanthropic. This leaves him with less: less food, less money, less time... everything that from a biological standpoint would leave the hypothetical "him" at the mercy of the wilds, at more of a risk of being picked off by any other predator.

The thing that I find fascinating is that the logical question from all of this is "At what point did we change our baser natures and how did we accomplish that?" Arthur C. Clarke mentions that it is "yet to be proven that intelligence has any survival value." And then the question above brings all sorts of other things arise from that, such as the adoption and adaptation of a justice system. How did what we view as "positive" moral aspirations become the social norm?

It's a good thing to donate to a charity. Why is that? Why are humans hard wired to try to react to the suffering of another person or creature, and want to help at a personal cost of time or money? Well, going back to biology, neuroscience talks about "mirror neurons." These neurons were discovered in the 1990's by Italian scientists, and are responsible, it seems, for empathy. They allow you to sympathize - when you see a person stub their toe or bang their head, you wince along with them. It's because the neuron in your brain reacts the their stimuli.

It's a little weird that your heartstrings are being pulled in your head, I think.

Studies on human nature, especially when said nature differs from the collective norm is amazing to me. (And especially since this collective norm apparently only applies to one species on the whole of the world.) Why is morality? A poorly worded question my English professor would throw a fit about. But maybe I'm over thinking it. Maybe we are what we are because through the thousands of years that we've (in our sapien form, at least) been around, we've decided that it's nicer to be nice.

01-24-2012, 04:08 AM	#1
Seil Super stressed! Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: British Columbia Posts: 8,081	"Super Science Headache Time" or "A Question About Morality And Emotions" So I want to study four things: sociology, philosophy, biology and theology. Why? Because I've finally figured out how to phrase... some sort of question: From a purely biological viewpoint, a predator is right to defend its most recent kill, claiming the food for itself and its young. However, this is seen in todays society as a faux pas, refusing someone because of apparent selfishness or greed. The greed and selfishness bits we would attribute to a antagonist theological figure, or as a part of ourselves that should be controlled or expunged. At the opposite end of the spectrum, there's the man who shares everything he's got. Societally philanthropic. This leaves him with less: less food, less money, less time... everything that from a biological standpoint would leave the hypothetical "him" at the mercy of the wilds, at more of a risk of being picked off by any other predator. The thing that I find fascinating is that the logical question from all of this is "At what point did we change our baser natures and how did we accomplish that?" Arthur C. Clarke mentions that it is "yet to be proven that intelligence has any survival value." And then the question above brings all sorts of other things arise from that, such as the adoption and adaptation of a justice system. How did what we view as "positive" moral aspirations become the social norm? It's a good thing to donate to a charity. Why is that? Why are humans hard wired to try to react to the suffering of another person or creature, and want to help at a personal cost of time or money? Well, going back to biology, neuroscience talks about "mirror neurons." These neurons were discovered in the 1990's by Italian scientists, and are responsible, it seems, for empathy. They allow you to sympathize - when you see a person stub their toe or bang their head, you wince along with them. It's because the neuron in your brain reacts the their stimuli. It's a little weird that your heartstrings are being pulled in your head, I think. Studies on human nature, especially when said nature differs from the collective norm is amazing to me. (And especially since this collective norm apparently only applies to one species on the whole of the world.) Why is morality? A poorly worded question my English professor would throw a fit about. But maybe I'm over thinking it. Maybe we are what we are because through the thousands of years that we've (in our sapien form, at least) been around, we've decided that it's nicer to be nice.