----- Original Message ----- From: "Deborah Harrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, July 26, 2004 7:05 PM Subject: Re: Terrorism too close to home...
> > Robert Seeberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [Snip everything for the sake of a tangent] > > > > The question going through my mind is : Are genetic > > imperatives rational? > > Not at all. Just look at how insane MAD war is/was, > although in caveman days it made genetic sense to wipe > out a competing tribe in times of severe privation > (say many years of drought and famine). > > > I'm going to take it for granted that Erik is > > arguing from a > > moral/ethical point of view, and in that he is > > correct in describing Gary's scenario as irrational. > > > > But from a genetic point of view I think the answers > > are very > > different. Once you have reproduced, a parents sole > > (in terms of > > genetics) purpose in life is to protect ones > > offspring. (And/or to produce more.) > > > > Another idea that comes to mind is that morality and > > ethics are new > > things that have only existed for a few thousand > > years, but genetic > > imperatives have been around for at least a billion > > years. > > Our brains likewise have many many millions of years > steeped in "reptile" mode & function [food, sex], many > millions of years in "mammal" mode [food, sex, > offspring, social hierarchy], millions in primate mode > [food, sex, offspring, social hierarchy and society, > curiosity/fun], and much less as _Homo sapiens_ the > thinking, dancing, singing ape. > That's all true, but I was thinking more along the lines of [reproduce] [compete for resources] [ensure proliferation of your genetic package] as being the primal genetic imperatives. What I'm thinking is that it is odd to call a system that has worked well (and indeed, led to our existence) irrational. It has to have followed some sort of logical system of rules, else it would have failed. IOW genetics and the imperatives that have evolved out of genetics are an ordered system, subject to the effects of chaos, but not chaotic itself. Maybe I'm wrong, but the randomness one sees in genetics and evolution seems to be quite orderly and rational. (Not purposeful mind you, but survival and expansion oriented.) Humans, being social animals, created ethics/morality to enhance our ability to co-operate in order to compete with other species, and provide for continuance of our genetic package. As seen in this discussion, genetic imperatives and ethical/moral imperatives can be conflicting. Generally (AFAICT) we are going to favor ethical/moral imperatives, but does that mean that ethical/moral imperatives trump genetic imperatives every time? I'm thinking that genetic imperatives are rational, but in most cases are not preferred when in conflict with ethics/morality. xponent The Jungle Or The Anthill Maru rob _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
