(September 11, 2012 at 5:28 pm)Red Celt Wrote:So evolution made a mistake? It seems to me the more pitiable-looking humans are the ones we're most likely to help--and they have bad genes.(September 11, 2012 at 5:12 pm)Undeceived Wrote: In The Selfish Gene Dawkins gave two reasons for apparently altruistic actions: 1) the person I help has my genes, or 2) the person I help will reciprocate. Well, say I give up my bus seat to an old lady. She neither has my genes, nor is she likely to pay me back. Not only that, but she's rather weak and probably the last person on the bus I'd like to reproduce for humankind. Or take me sending food rations to children in Africa. They neither have my genes nor are they capable of sending me anything in return. If you wish to make the case for altruistic actions helping society as a whole, even evolutionists stop short of that argument. Internal natural selection forbids my helping weaker individuals at the expense of myself. You're right, other humans benefit from my altruistic actions... but my DNA carrying the altruism gene will not be passed to my children.
I'm pretty sure that he also mentioned that these in-built empathies are contagious and can extend to people who are not genetically linked to us. Much as we feel empathy for cute "baby-faced" animals (like kittens) that are treated cruelly, but less empathetic for ugly animals (like prawns) receiving the same treatment.
Quote:You also completely missed the point that morality long predated Christianity. I mean... really long. So Christianity borrowed from earlier models, which borrowed from models even older... right back until pre-religious times.Christianity is the fulfillment of Judaism. According to the Old Testament God was with Adam and Eve and the Hebrew people since the beginning of time. The Ten Commandments have not changed, nor has the Spirit of the Law Jesus spoke about.
http://www.ucg.org/bible-study-lesson/bi...pirit-law/