Evolution cannot account for morality

[brewer]

Evidence please.

There are pro-social and anti-social people who grew up in the same basic environment. Their environment did not make them pro-social or anti-social, the cause of those conditions is more fundamental than environmental influence.

Evidence please, not opinion.

[Ahriman]

There are pro-social and anti-social people who grew up in the same basic environment. Their environment did not make them pro-social or anti-social, the cause of those conditions is more fundamental than environmental influence.

Evidence please, not opinion.

It's not an opinion. I've provided evidence. Your failure to discern what I've said as evidence is only your own ignorance speaking.

[brewer]

Evidence please, not opinion.

It's not an opinion. I've provided evidence. Your failure to discern what I've said as evidence is only your own ignorance speaking.

No, you've provided opinion, not evidence.

[Ahriman]

It's not an opinion. I've provided evidence. Your failure to discern what I've said as evidence is only your own ignorance speaking.

No, you've provided opinion, not evidence.

Environment has nothing to do with anything. It's obvious to more intelligent people. I don't know what else to tell you.

[brewer]

No, you've provided opinion, not evidence.

Environment has nothing to do with anything. It's obvious to more intelligent people. I don't know what else to tell you.

You can supply me evidence, not opinion.

But truthfully I expected nothing more from you.

[Ahriman]

Environment has nothing to do with anything. It's obvious to more intelligent people. I don't know what else to tell you.

You can supply me evidence, not opinion.

But truthfully I expected nothing more from you.

Well here's the thing, there isn't really any hard "evidence" for what I'm talking about, it's more like something a highly intelligent person would understand intuitively. And in fact, you probably know there's no way I can prove my position, which is why you keep demanding "evidence", as a gotcha. Not everything in life can be backed up by evidence, some things are just intuitively understood.

[The Grand Nudger]

Another assertion contrary to a mountain of facts, Ahri.

Let’s try something else. Why is this assertion important to you? What is it holding up. What thing far more important to you than whether you’re right or wrong, in fact, do you believe this assertion to be necessary to?

[chiknsld]

I would agree.  We cannot get what is normally thought of as morality from evolution.  We also can't get it from the Judeo-Christian god.  I imagine that goes for Allah, as well.

This simply means that morality is a bit of a head-scratcher.  The most obvious answer is that morality as commonly conceived doesn't exist.  It's just an error to think that things are right or wrong independent of specific interests.  The idea that there is good in the moral sense that isn't based on good in the sense of instrumental utility would just be an error.

I think I am starting to see where I went wrong. I basically said to myself, well if morality cannot come from evolution (biological evolution specifically) then evolution must come from a transcendent power. But my mistake is that I did not realize (very foolishly) that it could just have been a creation of social dynamics.

[The Architect Of Fate]

What other kind of evolution is there?

[chiknsld]

We cannot get our morality from evolution because evolution does not care about how we treat others. Also, it makes no sense that we have instincts therefore it makes more sense that God wanted us to have instincts. Evolution only starts with life, which makes no sense, it should show how inanimate matter turns into life as well. Also, if evolution has all this power then where does evolution come from?

Something smells.

You're quite the welcoming person!