|
vincentML -> RE: Weak men advocate for social equality (5/24/2017 8:51:42 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Awareness
No vincent, it doesn't suggest anything of the sort, this is more wishful thinking on your part. Humanity exists because of the ruthlessness of our ancestors and true altruism is an incredibly rare social event in the human species.
I'm amused at your desperate need to cobble together a bunch of tosh as a defense mechanism. Your ego is more fragile than I thought.
I am more than amused to watch your game of non-replies to those of us who have commented on your topic. In each case, instead of addressing the points made with specific counter point you reply with some unsupported generalization. To say that true altruism is an incredibly rare social event in the human species without support is a useless remark. If you have nothing to back up your comment, it does not qualify as anything more than opinion, which in your case has little credibility.
On the occurrence of altruism, A'ness:
1. You allude to the alleged ruthlessness of our ancestors as the single factor of the survival of the species. You offer no support for your statement. We are exposed to a great deal of ruthlessness that has occurred following the agricultural settlements when kings and priests could raise armies of mercenaries and serfs. It is all written in our histories, which makes it salient but proves nothing except that ruthlessness has been prevalent in later civic organizations. That does not give you permission, without needed support, to project backwards into the first roving bands and tribes of humankind,
Rather, ruthlessness is a progeny of territory, not of human nature. Ruthlessness accounts for the survival of the landed society, not of the species. The news of the barbarity of nations overwhelms and hides the news of altruistic activities; that does not mean the latter do not occur in abundance. The flaw in your logic is that your opinion projects backwards to a time from which there is little news. So, you can only presume. But your presumption ignores the fact that survival of the species resulted from adaptations to very different environmental conditions.
2. Incidentally, I have read other studies which support the observation that in the apes in nature the female does not necessarily choose the strongest male to father her children but she chooses the one who is most likely to stay nearby and offer support to her and her progeny.
3. survival of the species depends upon the expansion and variation of the population. If anything, ruthlessness is antithetical to the concept of species survival, especially rampant ruthlessness intra-species.
I do hope I have encouraged some pursuit of scholarship on your part, A'ness. Your inability to formulate thoughtful replies suggests you need much more study.
Have a good day, sport.
|
|
|
|
