Skip to forum content

You are not logged in. Please login or register.

Forum Oi! → Chit-Chat → Morality based on innate psychological systems

Pages 1

You must login or register to post a reply

RSS topic feed

Posts: 16


Animals such as corvids ( crows,magpies) and lower primates also display moral behaviours and altruism, as well as an awareness of fairness.  Human beings are not unique in that.


Yes, and that is part of where this view finds support -- in biology.
For the unfairness between cucumber and grape rewards, see


Invitations are sent.


"Whether we believe in God yet or not, He's our Creator..."
That's begging the question.


You believe in a god that you can't prove exists, and you admonish us and demonize us for not believing in a god that you can't prove exists.


Nature v nurture. There are algorithms to define the empirical side, the ethics tend to devolve into a bog of anti-religion empiricism and pro mystery. I tend to see intuitive morality as a bundle of traits, all of which express themselves in any individual as ranges of behavior that occur in a normal distribution, the interaction of which creates the myriad personalities we see in the primates around us. No intent and little cognition required. Existence precedes essence.       Opinions vary.   .


Faith is, in and of itself,  evidence of things unseen. Arguing with a chimera is exasperating but vaguely admirable.


One could make a similar argument that conservatives are basing their morality primarily on authority/subversion and loyalty/betrayal to the same extents you allege for liberals concerning numbers 1 and 2.
I hasten to add: I think both arguments are specious.  I don't think there is difference between conservatives and liberals concerning how they develop their morals.


I don't think it's only about how morals are developed. 
It seems to be about where a person's views are within a system and how the systems do or do not relate to each other. 
The suggestion that "'liberals' may be creating a morality mainly based on the Care/harm foundation, with some support from the Fairness/cheating system" can be understood to mean that they put more focus in those two, perhaps to the point of crowding out the other three.
OTOH, a "conservative" might be as you describe, but "religious conservatives" certainly seem to include #5.  And many "conservatives" seem to include #1 in how they view immigration issues and #2 in how they view government assistance and law enforcement.


I wouldn't say that this is correct, but it is a nice idea explaining morality.


Folllowing the Evolution line we face a feedback among organisms and environment, because Life is an open system that need to receive and transfer continously to maintain its balance, so also behavior and facts "engrave" organism, is a side or evolution's process, compatible with religion or not-religion


agreed that biology goes on regardless of whether religion is present or not.


Male bottle-nose dolphins are known to gang rape females, so some animals certainly don't employ care and fairness principles.


hmmm...  and many (all?) dolphins give birth to live young and have to care for them to some degree
OTOH, some (many?) fish have hatchlings that are potentially food for even the parents that gave rise to the eggs.
I think I'm not sure where your point leads.  human beings are certainly capable of atrocious, immoral/unethical behavior. 
if other animals are the same, what does that mean for the possible existence of innate behaviors regarding morality/ethics in humans and other animals?


Is it possible for dolphins to behave immorally?


don't know, but maybe they do and humans just haven't understood it yet.
but there are certainly examples in other animals of behavior that humans interpret as related to fairness:

Posts: 16

Pages 1

You must login or register to post a reply

Forum Oi! → Chit-Chat → Morality based on innate psychological systems

Similar topics in this forum