What is your take on evolution/old age earth?

[sapphi_snake]

Slimebeast said:

sapphi_snake said:

Slimebeast said:

The mystery of human altruism and morals. Even Dawkins admits that it's very mysterious.

What's so mysterious about morals? Us humans are social animals that live in societies based on interdependence. This is actually one of the main reasons for our success as a species.  Morals are nothing more than general socieal rules that need to be respected in order for people to be able to live together. All social animals (ants, bees, chimps etc.) modify their behaviour in order to restrain selfishness and make group living possible. Basically morality has the purpose of restricting excessive individualism and promoting cooperation.

There are hundreds of species that are highly social, interdependent and successful - dolphins, wolves, prairie dogs, ants, bees - so does that mean that ants have morals?

You describe morals as "general social rules" (bolded). Well, a wolf pack has very strict social rules. Rats have social rules too, like most mammals do. So are you saying that rats and wolves have morals?

Of course they do. But when you say morals you're thinking of the complex social rules of human society. Obviously animals have less complex social rules , but they nevertheless have a sense of what type of behaviour is acceptable or not acceptable within their primitive animal communities. And engaging in inappropriate behaviour draws negative consiquences from the rest of the group, just like in human society.Sound like morals to me. 

As for your comment regarding absolute morals, well real life pretty much proves you're wrong. An example of relative morals is people's attitude towards killing. It was not cosidered at all immoral for gladiators to be forced to kill eachother in the Roman Empire. During the Middle Ages it was not considered at all immoral in Europe to kill a non-christian, or someon who commited heresies. Even today people's attitude towards killing varies. For example in most European nations the death penalty is considered barbaric and highly immoral, while in Texas (for example) it's considered a perfectly acceptable practice.  There are some countries where honor killing is practiced. and of course let's not forget soldiers. No one calls soldiers ruthless killers and murderers, even though they kill others. Such words can only be used to describe soldier from rival nations, but never from your own (if that's not relative morality I don't know what is).