Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.
Reward Points: | 30 |
Efficiency:
Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive). Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high. | 100% |
Arguments: | 21 |
Debates: | 2 |
The whole of my argument is that there is no morality, merely the continuation of principles that make civilization, and society able to exist. Which makes me think that I am on the wrong side at this point.
In my opinion, everything in science, say: a complex mechanism can be explained by the very rudimentary laws that govern it, and it's the simplicity of each individual piece that allows such complexity; IE. Evolution itself is going from simple to complex.
Basic survival instincts are to be selfish, and to fight for personal gain, however animals that were solely like this were more like to die out from their own competition for resources.
However this meant that animals that worked together were more apt to survive, and reproduce (offspring that would then reproduce, because they fought for the survival of their young.)
In instances where it is more profitable for an individual to break these contracts, then they return to a more selfish nature.
Ducks will steal food, because although the preservation of their species is important (evolutionary propagation of genes to take care of one species, propagates the species, by ensuring the reproduction of the species) It is more important to an organism to pass on it's own genetic material. (Organisms whose focus is to pass on their genetic information are more likely to reproduce and pass on their own genetic information)
Morals are an evolutionary adaptation to ensure the survival of a species.
I don't think there is such thing as morals, other than the contracts formed by evolution, I agree with you on that it came about through evolution (on the other page, though I disagree on that one point). I would say however that emotions are also the result of evolution.
(My original statement is made for the other side)
Tribes of lions, flocks of birds, any large grouping of animal, they don't kill each other, it may not be so complicated as with humans, but they 'agree' more or less that it is better for them to not kill each other.
That sounds more like an evolutionary adaptation then a formal, or even informal agreement, but animals less likely to harm their own 'tribe' or group are more likely to survive.
I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know! |