While waiting for Arcanus' response to the earlier Wilson quote, I thought I'd offer some thoughts on Wilson's main objection in the film; namely that although Hitchens can determine right and wrong, he can offer no explanation as to where it comes from.
I think that morality has been partially explanied by Darwinian methods. The theories and experiments on altruism have been well documented, and this is a good beginning for the basis of morality. However I think that the often overlooked element is that of language.
Once language evolved within early humans, there developed the extraordinary ability to "think in words". The ability to 'think in words' allows people to contemplate one's past and one's future, rather than being forever locked within the present moment. This in turn allows people to think outside of their own physical being, both temporally and physically. The upshot of which is that the earliest human beings could 'put themselves' in the place of others. Imagagining what it is lilke, to be in "someone elses shoes".
Consequently they could imagine what it would be like to suffer pain at anothers hand, to suffer embarassment through one's own actions and so on... At this point people could begin thinking "What happened to him is terrible, I'd hate the same to happen to me"/"How he treated her was terrible, I'd hate someone to treat me like that".
This being the beginning of empathy. Once these functions are in place, it is not a stretch of the imagination to propose societies starting to encourage such empathetic behaviours, and these behaviours then being both naturally selected, but also intellectually contemplated.
Just some thoughts?
I think that morality has been partially explanied by Darwinian methods. The theories and experiments on altruism have been well documented, and this is a good beginning for the basis of morality. However I think that the often overlooked element is that of language.
Once language evolved within early humans, there developed the extraordinary ability to "think in words". The ability to 'think in words' allows people to contemplate one's past and one's future, rather than being forever locked within the present moment. This in turn allows people to think outside of their own physical being, both temporally and physically. The upshot of which is that the earliest human beings could 'put themselves' in the place of others. Imagagining what it is lilke, to be in "someone elses shoes".
Consequently they could imagine what it would be like to suffer pain at anothers hand, to suffer embarassment through one's own actions and so on... At this point people could begin thinking "What happened to him is terrible, I'd hate the same to happen to me"/"How he treated her was terrible, I'd hate someone to treat me like that".
This being the beginning of empathy. Once these functions are in place, it is not a stretch of the imagination to propose societies starting to encourage such empathetic behaviours, and these behaviours then being both naturally selected, but also intellectually contemplated.
Just some thoughts?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Common sense is genius dressed in its working clothes.
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Common sense is genius dressed in its working clothes.
Ralph Waldo Emerson
