Greetings Rog,
Q. Do you agree that man has innate moral tendencies?
A.Yes
Q.Do you agree that our moral tendencies have improved
in sophistication over the past few million years?
A.Yes, however I would choose to focus on the most recent branching of our
lineage. Modern humans were and are capable of so much more than previous
hominids (Cro-magnum, Homo-Neanderthal,H. Africanus, etc.) This is why I chose
the later date(30K ya, although H. Sapiens may have first appeared in Africa
100-200K ya their emergence from Africa is thought to be 30-80K ya). Although
the earlier hominids were social beings (as many mammals are) they show little
evidence of social evolution. There is a recent article in Scientific American
by Ian Tattersall(Dec 2001), where he suggests that langauge (not intellect) is
what distinguished Modern humans (Homo sapiens) from previous hominids.
Afterall, H. Neanderthals had a larger cranium and presumably a larger brain. It
seems reasonable to assume that they may have possessed greater intellectual
powers. H. Sapiens were able to develop langauge due to an "exaptation" of a
much longer pharynx than H.Nean. that was evolutionary selected for the
respiratory advatages (perhaps, running down large mammels). This long pharynx
provided the means for the development of langauge, which marks the
characteristic difference of H. Sapiens which led to the emergence of complex
societies (about 10K ya--with the emergence of agriculture).
Q. Do you agree that
mankind has improved in the ability to cooperate (even in socially amiable
competitive ways*) across larger spans?
A. We have progressed towards greater and greater complexity in our societies
over the past 10K years(I choose this date to coincide with agriculture and
sedentary pop vs. nomadic hunters and gatherers). This can be thought of as an
improvement if this progression is deemed to be an advance from low to high
quality (trying to stay within the MOQ framework here-probably unsuccesfully). I
don't agree that this is true. Society has evolved towards greater complexity,
becuase that is what dynamic systems do when they possess the means. With the
emergence of langauge, H. Sap. possessed the unique ability to begin this
progression. The "innate" abilities to cooperate and compete have always been
there from the first H. Saps. The evolution of complexity on the social level
has used a heathy dose of both. For an entertaining read that gives a useful
account of the competitive aspect of this progression I would reccommend Jared
Diamponds "Guns, Germs, and Steel."
Q. Do you agree that humans are more
socially advanced than other primates?
A.Yes
One last comment;
You said "I am referring to innate human tendencies toward sympathy, duty, a
sense of embarrassment, loyalty, honesty, fairness, etc. These are of course
often at odds with our tendencies toward cruelty, selfishness, dishonesty,
status, etc. Both sets are well-documented tendencies across the majority of
cultures. The point is that humans are complex social beings, and have evolved
(granted imperfect) capabilities to exist and thrive as such social beings."
I agree. It is only that I think these innate qualities have not evolved over
the period that I think we both agree has characterized the increase in social
complexity. That is why I chose 30Kya if somewhat arbitrarily. We really don't
witness these great leaps in social evolution until the emergence of agriculture
around 10K ya. "Our tendencys toward cruelty, selfishness, dishonesty, status,
etc" maintain a presence in todays society that is equal to any moment in recent
history (30k ya). In fact, these traits along with the other set of "desireable"
traits have played equal roles in the "evolution of complexity."
Regards,
Andy
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:46 BST