Total Posts:89|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The Moral Animal

Yvette
Posts: 859
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 2:55:06 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I have a question. First, please read this article:

http://www.pbs.org...

tl;dr Bonobos are very promiscuous, egalitarian, gentle, "hippie" versions of the warlock common chimpanzee. They are empathetic, even outside their own species, though unfortunately we have barely been able to study them because they are so rare. A story is given where a bonobo tries to help an injured bird.

Now, assuming we are able to study these fascinating creatures more before they go extinct (way to go humans) and do not find anything to contradict that they are as promiscuous, egalitarian, gentle, and kind as we have seen, I have a few questions.

I am sure some theists will dodge these questions by trying to make light of these things, that is inevitable. If you choose to do so in order to not answer the questions, however, I ask you to admit that you don't think this is truly as moral as I think, but to however answer the questions as if they were true.

1. The act of trying to help a creature outside one's species with no benefit for oneself (and not to the exclusion of helping others) is the very peak of morality and empathy. With this in mind, would you still say that bonobos, or even specifically this one bonobo, has no morals? Does it have a soul? Is it impossible for the same thing guiding this behavior to guide our better side?

2. Why would God design some creatures to be cruel and torture each other, while designing a creature like the bonobo to be gentle and help not only each other but other species? Why give the bonobo empathy?

3. Promiscuity and increased gender equality often go hand in hand in the primate world. I recently read a study that showed that increased gender equality in humans is causing less hypergamy (women seeking out wealthy/powerful mates only) and more promiscuity. Why would God allow an evil and a good to be codependent?

4. On what real basis (ie not Biblical) can you say that the Bonobo does not have a soul, or even any non-human creature, when there is no evidence for it in humans? How can we infer that outside, conscious thought drives humans and not animals? I expect that because "humans are so high above animals in their thinking" to be the answer, however, I am guessing any theists who says this will protest admirably to the suggestion that the young or mentally challenged have no souls.

Some more reading:

http://songweaver.com...
http://primates.com...

And not bonobos, but worth reading:
http://www.koko.org...
In the middle of moving to Washington. 8D

"If God does not exist, then chocolate causing cancer is only true for the society that has evidence for that." --GodSands
lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 3:19:55 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/15/2010 2:55:06 PM, Yvette wrote:

I haven't read any of the links or watched the video yet (I will) but I do want to say that this seems to be exactly what I've been trying to say.
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave
Yvette
Posts: 859
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:16:41 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/15/2010 3:24:54 PM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Be prepared for a bonobos have free will argument

The theists are being oddly quiet for the moment.
In the middle of moving to Washington. 8D

"If God does not exist, then chocolate causing cancer is only true for the society that has evidence for that." --GodSands
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:19:13 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
warlock common chimpanzee
The what?

they are so rare

Not surprising after all that hippie crap.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Yvette
Posts: 859
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:19:35 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
"Bonobos are very promiscuous, egalitarian, gentle, "hippie" versions of the warlock common chimpanzee."

What the hell kind of typo is that?

Warlock chimpanzees must be bad@ss.
In the middle of moving to Washington. 8D

"If God does not exist, then chocolate causing cancer is only true for the society that has evidence for that." --GodSands
Yvette
Posts: 859
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:21:46 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/15/2010 6:19:13 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
warlock common chimpanzee
The what?

they are so rare

Not surprising after all that hippie crap.

Looks like I noticed the typo right after you.

That "hippie crap" is part of human nature. You know, empathy and all that.
In the middle of moving to Washington. 8D

"If God does not exist, then chocolate causing cancer is only true for the society that has evidence for that." --GodSands
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:23:40 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
That "hippie crap" is part of human nature. You know, empathy and all that.
What precisely am I?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Atheism
Posts: 2,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:25:22 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/15/2010 6:23:40 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
That "hippie crap" is part of human nature. You know, empathy and all that.
What precisely am I?

An objectivist who has cast away most emotions.
Which is epic.
I miss the old members.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:26:37 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/15/2010 6:25:22 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:23:40 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
That "hippie crap" is part of human nature. You know, empathy and all that.
What precisely am I?

An objectivist who has cast away most emotions.
Which is epic.

Whoa whoa whoa. Objectivists don't "cast away" their emotions. They just recognize the proper place and function of those feelings. :)
Yvette
Posts: 859
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:27:40 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/15/2010 6:23:40 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
That "hippie crap" is part of human nature. You know, empathy and all that.
What precisely am I?

A human. Being less or more empathetic does not change that. It's called a personality. People value different things.

I thought you were into the whole evolutionary psychology thing, you should know.
In the middle of moving to Washington. 8D

"If God does not exist, then chocolate causing cancer is only true for the society that has evidence for that." --GodSands
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:28:47 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/15/2010 6:26:37 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:25:22 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:23:40 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
That "hippie crap" is part of human nature. You know, empathy and all that.
What precisely am I?

An objectivist who has cast away most emotions.
Which is epic.

Whoa whoa whoa. Objectivists don't "cast away" their emotions. They just recognize the proper place and function of those feelings. :)

No wonder Objectivists seem like robots. O.O
Atheism
Posts: 2,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:30:34 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/15/2010 6:26:37 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:25:22 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:23:40 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
That "hippie crap" is part of human nature. You know, empathy and all that.
What precisely am I?

An objectivist who has cast away most emotions.
Which is epic.

Whoa whoa whoa. Objectivists don't "cast away" their emotions. They just recognize the proper place and function of those feelings. :)
I said an objectivist who has cast away most emotions. If I wanted to say what you took it as, I would've just said a person. In no way, shape, or form did I imply that all objectivists cast away emotions.

"An objectivist.."
He is an objectivist, correct? And objectivists tend to not care as much. Or, at least from my personal experience.

"...Who has cast away emotions."
So he is an objectivist, and he has cast away emotions.
I never stated that objectivists cast away emotions, I just stated he did, and he happened to be an objectivist.
I miss the old members.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:30:52 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/15/2010 6:28:47 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:26:37 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:25:22 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:23:40 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
That "hippie crap" is part of human nature. You know, empathy and all that.
What precisely am I?

An objectivist who has cast away most emotions.
Which is epic.

Whoa whoa whoa. Objectivists don't "cast away" their emotions. They just recognize the proper place and function of those feelings. :)

No wonder Objectivists seem like robots. O.O

Because we aren't sappy pity-mongers?
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:31:07 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/15/2010 6:28:47 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:26:37 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:25:22 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:23:40 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
That "hippie crap" is part of human nature. You know, empathy and all that.
What precisely am I?

An objectivist who has cast away most emotions.
Which is epic.

Whoa whoa whoa. Objectivists don't "cast away" their emotions. They just recognize the proper place and function of those feelings. :)

No wonder Objectivists seem like robots. O.O

Authoritarian leftist identified. Destroy. Destroy. Dest....

ooh, there's a shortage of widgets! Let's go be productive and make money!

*makes money*

What was I saying again?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Atheism
Posts: 2,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:31:46 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/15/2010 6:31:07 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:28:47 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:26:37 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:25:22 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:23:40 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
That "hippie crap" is part of human nature. You know, empathy and all that.
What precisely am I?

An objectivist who has cast away most emotions.
Which is epic.

Whoa whoa whoa. Objectivists don't "cast away" their emotions. They just recognize the proper place and function of those feelings. :)

No wonder Objectivists seem like robots. O.O

Authoritarian leftist identified. Destroy. Destroy. Dest....


ooh, there's a shortage of widgets! Let's go be productive and make money!

*makes money*

What was I saying again?

You were talking about stuff. Particularly doodles and thingamabobs.
I miss the old members.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:34:00 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/15/2010 6:30:34 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:26:37 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:25:22 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:23:40 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
That "hippie crap" is part of human nature. You know, empathy and all that.
What precisely am I?

An objectivist who has cast away most emotions.
Which is epic.

Whoa whoa whoa. Objectivists don't "cast away" their emotions. They just recognize the proper place and function of those feelings. :)
I said an objectivist who has cast away most emotions. If I wanted to say what you took it as, I would've just said a person. In no way, shape, or form did I imply that all objectivists cast away emotions.

"An objectivist.."
He is an objectivist, correct? And objectivists tend to not care as much. Or, at least from my personal experience.

We just care about different things, none of which include the majority of our fellow men (not in any primary sense, anyway). On balance, I'd say we're actually far more caring. We're simply more selective, and more sincere. :P

"...Who has cast away emotions."
So he is an objectivist, and he has cast away emotions.
I never stated that objectivists cast away emotions, I just stated he did, and he happened to be an objectivist.

Fair enough, then.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:36:49 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/15/2010 6:35:48 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
I could never be an objectivist. I generally care more about others than myself.

Sell computer.

Gief money to starving africans.

Now. Oops, another one just died because you were slow. Hurry.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Atheism
Posts: 2,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:38:52 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/15/2010 6:35:48 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
I could never be an objectivist. I generally care more about others than myself.
Objectivists, like myself, take the best course of action, and try to put emotions to the side when arguing about critical matters.
Your daughter is being held ransom. In return, you must give her a weapon which destroys the world.
Now, what I would do is let my daughter die. It doesn't make much sense to be reunited with my daughter only to be blown to bits three seconds later.
I miss the old members.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:41:39 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/15/2010 6:38:52 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:35:48 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
I could never be an objectivist. I generally care more about others than myself.
Objectivists, like myself, take the best course of action, and try to put emotions to the side when arguing about critical matters.
Your daughter is being held ransom. In return, you must give her a weapon which destroys the world.
Now, what I would do is let my daughter die. It doesn't make much sense to be reunited with my daughter only to be blown to bits three seconds later.

In that scenario I would sacrifice my daughter if it meant the world wouldn't be blown up. Better one person dying than everybody.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:42:16 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/15/2010 6:38:52 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:35:48 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
I could never be an objectivist. I generally care more about others than myself.
Objectivists, like myself
wha?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Atheism
Posts: 2,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:43:11 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/15/2010 6:42:16 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:38:52 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:35:48 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
I could never be an objectivist. I generally care more about others than myself.
Objectivists, like myself
wha?
What?
I don't understand your wha?
Does not computer.
All your base are belong to us.
I miss the old members.
Yvette
Posts: 859
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:44:15 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/15/2010 6:43:11 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:42:16 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:38:52 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:35:48 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
I could never be an objectivist. I generally care more about others than myself.
Objectivists, like myself
wha?
What?
I don't understand your wha?
Does not computer.
All your base are belong to us.

Ragnar's a libertarian, Ayn Rand kind of "Objectivist". Different from what you mean in referring to yourself.
In the middle of moving to Washington. 8D

"If God does not exist, then chocolate causing cancer is only true for the society that has evidence for that." --GodSands
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:44:35 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/15/2010 6:43:11 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:42:16 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:38:52 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:35:48 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
I could never be an objectivist. I generally care more about others than myself.
Objectivists, like myself
wha?
What?
I don't understand your wha?
Does not computer.
All your base are belong to us.

Your profile says that you're both an Objectivist and a moral relativist/nihilist. That's impossible, since those two are entirely contradictory concepts.
Atheism
Posts: 2,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:46:25 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/15/2010 6:44:35 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:43:11 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:42:16 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:38:52 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:35:48 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
I could never be an objectivist. I generally care more about others than myself.
Objectivists, like myself
wha?
What?
I don't understand your wha?
Does not computer.
All your base are belong to us.

Your profile says that you're both an Objectivist and a moral relativist/nihilist. That's impossible, since those two are entirely contradictory concepts.
It does?
-Goes to look at profile-
I miss the old members.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:47:20 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/15/2010 6:46:25 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:44:35 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:43:11 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:42:16 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:38:52 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:35:48 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
I could never be an objectivist. I generally care more about others than myself.
Objectivists, like myself
wha?
What?
I don't understand your wha?
Does not computer.
All your base are belong to us.

Your profile says that you're both an Objectivist and a moral relativist/nihilist. That's impossible, since those two are entirely contradictory concepts.
It does?
-Goes to look at profile-
also says "Equality for all' and "national health care: Pro" among other things
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:49:52 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/15/2010 6:47:20 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:46:25 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:44:35 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:43:11 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:42:16 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:38:52 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:35:48 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
I could never be an objectivist. I generally care more about others than myself.
Objectivists, like myself
wha?
What?
I don't understand your wha?
Does not computer.
All your base are belong to us.

Your profile says that you're both an Objectivist and a moral relativist/nihilist. That's impossible, since those two are entirely contradictory concepts.
It does?
-Goes to look at profile-
also says "Equality for all' and "national health care: Pro" among other things

I wasn't sure what he meant by "Equality for all", and I didn't bother to look at his BIG Issues. Good catches, though.
Atheism
Posts: 2,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2010 6:50:19 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/15/2010 6:44:35 PM, Cody_Franklin wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:43:11 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:42:16 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:38:52 PM, Atheism wrote:
At 7/15/2010 6:35:48 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
I could never be an objectivist. I generally care more about others than myself.
Objectivists, like myself
wha?
What?
I don't understand your wha?
Does not computer.
All your base are belong to us.

Your profile says that you're both an Objectivist and a moral relativist/nihilist. That's impossible, since those two are entirely contradictory concepts.
So it does.
Hm. Well, I think both are plausible. If one of them fails me, I'd go with the other.
Objectivism:Think clinically about the situation, and see if it infringes on the rights of others.
Moral relativism:Situation may or may not be permissable depending on Life experience.
If anything, I'm an objectivist first. If the topic in question is too hard to decipher if it infringes on the rights of others for my tastes, I'd have to go with moral relativism.
Objectivism first, and then moral relativism.
I miss the old members.