Evolution cannot account for morality

[The Grand Nudger]

It would be difficult to forget what every member of a society sees clearly, wouldn't it? Like forgetting the sun. We don't talk about the sun much, but it isn't because we've moved beyond it or it's been mooted. That sounds like a description of a society so thoroughly suffused with and steeped in a morality that all members agree to the exact same set of moral facts. A society more moralistic than our own, not less, or completely amoral.

[chiknsld]

That's very interesting, do you think that an advanced species is capable of not having any morality at all? Or do you think that life itself requires morality as it would require group dynamics, compromise, etc.?

Interesting question. 

If we define morality as a set guidelines for group interaction, then it seems to me (off the top of my head) that any social group would require it. Social primates other than us seem to have customs or social laws for how they organize their hierarchies, who gets the best stuff, etc. Whether we want to call that a morality or not I'm not sure. Some people might want to insist that to qualify as morality, the customs must be conceptualized and therefore something we can debate and codify officially. That would mean that bonobos go by instinct rather than morality. I'm not sure.

There are two very interesting Christian writers who felt that people, in their most advanced state, would grow out of morality. That's if we're defining morality as a set of rules, customs, or traditions imposed on the individual by society or by God, and which the individual may kick against. 

Antinomian Christians like William Blake felt that any sort of codified morality was from Satan. He thought that Jehovah's commandments of the Old Testament were really from the devil, and only Jesus was truly God. He emphasized that Jesus, being a perfect person, didn't follow any moral law but operated only from instinct. And since his instinct was perfect, his behavior was always good. This is a kind of life beyond morality, in which the person acting is so in tune with what is Good that no rules, customs, or mores are necessary. 

Blake was an optimist and thought that very advanced people could achieve a Christ-like state of instinct in this life. Very few Christians agree with him.

In the Divine Comedy, Dante posits a similar state of having a purely good character which places the individual beyond the moral law. Unlike Blake, though, he thought this state is only available to those who have died and been purified in Purgatory. At the top of the mountain, after Dante's sins have been purged, his guide tells him that now he should do whatever he wants, since whatever he wants will be good. (Sin, for Dante, is misdirected desire -- once it is purged all desires are perfectly directed to the Good.) 

So if we think of an advanced society not in science fiction terms but in terms of improved character, I can imagine a culture in which discussion of morality is forgotten, or moot. This would be because people have such clear understanding of what is good that no discussion is necessary. 

(I can imagine such a culture, but I am not optimistic. I am more like Dante than Blake, in that I don't think it's possible in a human lifetime.)

This is truly profound. An instinct that supersedes morality. 

And you know what, I would reckon as well that an advanced species would find moral codes to be trivial. 

So if the more intelligent a species becomes this means that morality will always be inevitable.

Thus, we may say that life leads to morality. You people believe in evolution therefore life leads to evolution.

So, as I was saying earlier in the thread, the universe will inevitably lead to live (eventually), life will inevitably lead to morality. Life will lead to evolution.

Thus, we may say that whenever there is a universe, there will be life, morality, and evolution.

Let us presume that the universe was always here, therefore the universe exists so that life could exist and life exists out of some sort of moral impetus. This leaves one final mystery, where does evolution come from? 

Evolution must have been there from the very beginning since it is already guaranteed from the outset of the universe being in existence. Thus, evolution is some sort of eternal power.

[The Grand Nudger]

Why would morality be inevitable? If life inevitably leads to morality then why does the overwhelming mass of life not appear to possess it? If there being a universe inevitably leads to life, then why is it so devoid of life?

More fundamentally, does the sort of fatalism involved in such propositions fit with any moral system you'd cosign? To dive in hard...are you comfortable in positing objective moral values existence so that theres something to be inevitably instantiated..and, if so, why would evolution not be able to account for a species that can observe such facts? Further, how does this state of affairs play into inevitability. As in, if we live in this fatalistic world proposed, so what if a species can observe a moral fact - they're going to do whatever they were always going to do..inevitably.

[chiknsld]

Why would morality be inevitable?  If life inevitably leads to morality then why does the overwhelming mass of life not appear to possess it?  If there being a universe inevitably leads to life, then why is it so devoid of life?  

More fundamentally, does the sort of fatalism involved in such propositions fit with any moral system you'd cosign?  To dive in hard...are you comfortable in positing objective moral values existence so that theres something to be inevitably instantiated..and, if so, why would evolution not be able to account for a species that can observe such facts?  Further, how does this state of affairs play into inevitability.  As in, if we live in this fatalistic world proposed, so what if a species can observe a moral fact - they're going to do whatever they were always going to do..inevitably.

That's actually very interesting, I'll have to read this over and think about it!

[Aegon]

Lmaooooo. What do you mean by "real?" Am I going to have to explain basic psychology to you?

Well considering that my degree is in psychology, I do not believe that would help your argument. Are you aware that many people do not believe that depression is real?

Of course. Most people, for most of time, have either not had a conception of depression or have actively opposed the acceptance of such a concept. Mental health stigma has been the norm, it's only now that this stigma is being lifted. But I don't really care how many people believe or do not believe in it.

Again, what do you mean by "real?"

[The Valkyrie]

You'd better start.

Offer something to the conversation or move on.

No, little man, YOU start doing what is requested by the admin staff or you'll be moved on.

And watch who the fuck you're talking to!

First and last warning.

[Angrboda]

The earth is full of advanced species that don't appear to identify items of moral import.  More of them than us.

What I mean is a species that is several orders of magnitude more advanced than humans, just hypothetically speaking.

I'd be fascinated if you could explain what you mean by "more advanced"? This seems to betray a gross misunderstanding of evolution, but I'll withhold judgment.

[The Grand Nudger]

It's good that someone will. I won't.

I think what we have here, is a person exclaiming that a thing they don't understand can't account for some other thing they don't understand.

[HappySkeptic]

Evolution must have been there from the very beginning since it is already guaranteed from the outset of the universe being in existence. Thus, evolution is some sort of eternal power.

Do you believe that everything that currently exists "existed" at the beginning of time?  That makes no sense.  If I say that the game of baseball was inevitable, does that mean baseball is some sort of eternal power?

First, there is no fatalism.  Complicated processes emerge - they aren't pre-existant.  The precursor to life was some sort of organic replicating molecule, and it would emerge from random processes in a environment that allowed it to exist.  With replication, environmental pressure, and random mutation, we get the process of evolution.

There are all sorts of emergent processes.  Most of the "laws" of the universe, like thermodynamics, actually emerge from the interaction of simpler principles.  A tornado is an emergent process.  Chaos is an emergent process.  I would postulate consciousness as an emergent process.

[The Grand Nudger]

Indeed, and things could have gone some other way. Such that there could be no consciousness, could be no tornados. Fatalism is....simply put..ignorant.