(August 10, 2013 at 11:24 am)Mister Agenda Wrote: It's quite a stretch to get 'told they are evil' from 'drives off thieves'.It's not at all a stretch to get it from "condemned."
Quote:It clearly benefits the group to be intolerant of stealing, to get angry about it, similar to the feeling we get when someone cuts in front of us or gets a bigger share of cake than we do. The thieving gorilla isn't condemned for being evil, they're just on their own because they're a liability to the group.He said they're condemned, you say they aren't. Go figure.
Quote:Evolution has given us the ability to form all kinds of ideologies, governments, philosophies, and religions; which often reflect our natural social instincts, but also reflect our experiences, history, imaginations, observations, and prejudices. They are our creations and there's no rational reason why we shouldn't judge them on their own merits and flaws.What criteria determine whether a behavior is natural v. our creations? If we are natural, are not our creations natural? Do we know that gorillas' behaviors aren't influenced by experiences, imaginations, etc?
Quote:Even if religion were a direct product of evolution, that wouldn't make it a good thing, unless you consider reproductive success to be the only measure of what is good. There's a fallacy named after claiming something is a moral good because it's natural.So you would take exception to the statement, "TA DA! There you have it. We have developed these sets of 'laws' naturally. We humans, like other animals, just get it, and do not need to be told that we are evil for being natural" - right?
