Social Darwinisnmo vs
strange things have happened to me, not if the lack of sleep or simply due to an evolutionary throwback. that has affected me in a while. my explanation is a bit convoluted, lacking bases understandable, except Pora some people. (the fault of the pig Darwin)
the origin of man and sexual selection: Darwin
said it is understandable that men are subjected to a severe struggle for better equipped to succeed. These statements have given reason to the creation of a stream called Social Darwinism (bastards) some people (robgar) believe we can expect that evolutionary science provides us moral.facil a code is to take the natural laws as "survival of the fittest" and used to justify political systems based on the exploitation of the weak by the powerful. is absolutely true that in nature the strong exploiting the weak, and it is also true that this fact is characteristic of the whole evolutionary process according to the Darwinian theory. But this does not mean we have to support a moral system in which a people exploit other people, or people that exploit animals. We're free and able to establish political and moral systems differ explicitly the principles of nature.
Now it is something to think a bit on standards or moral codes existentescomo moral behavior (according to me) is that which results in improving the welfare of the group or society at the expense of reducing the welfare of the individual. like that, I explain to apples but I ate them all. so using humans and livestock (MOST COMMON ARE THE APPLES): the farmer knows that to enhance and ensure plenty of livestock should not kill the pregnant female (no comment on the moral question about animals). but a child or farmer's family, who sees a pregnant female and tempted to kill and eat not think that. This would benefit in the short term, but will be a long-term disadvantage for himself and for all familiar.o can make moral gesture to let her live, reproduce and provide the household with the largest number of cattle later. Will the moral gesture?.
according to Darwin. except under special circumstances to engage his later (the aaron knows perfectly well what they are, I teach them) natural selection will favor the children and families who seek their own selfish short-term profit above the farmer moralist cares about the long-term interests of the group as a whole. This is because family members will benefit from immoral acts "moral"-made. to the same extent they benefit the family moralists. Therefore, but a moral act can increase the welfare of the family as a whole, within that family amoral individual moral actor earns more than the same individual moral.esto is because the moral idiot would pay the cost of self-control while the amoral nop.
benefits and costs (that's the part that you like someone, it seems that I'm on the side of the economy now) in this context is measured in terms of reproductive success, because that is Darwinian natural selection. therefore, genetic tendencies to behave selfishly will be transmitted to future generations in a higher rate than genetic tendencies to behave altruistically. therefore we should not expect to find ejemplos de este tipo de conducta altruista en la naturaleza y ahora vienen las exepciones es que medio sueño.
bueno para resumir, hay básicamente dos exepciones:
en primer lugar . a vista de otro, un familiar puede parecer que trabaja para el bienestar del otro, si es probable que el favor sea pagado posteriormente: una moralidad algo cínica.en segundo lugar, se puede esperar que un individuo se comporte moralmente si los posibles beneficiarios de su buena acción son sus parientes genéticos cercanos. esto es fácil de apreciar para el caso de la descendencia del individuo: las tendencias genéticas a comportarse generosamente son heredadas por los beneficiarios de su generosidad. así, siempre que la generosidad beneficie specifically to the descendants of the same. is easy to see why this altruism neopotista trends may become common. Mothers, for example, breastfeeding mothers and parents of both sexes are at risk to defend their children.
all primarily tribal and wild characteristics of homo sapiens are programmed to obey the hidden intention of their genes. filial love, sex drive, aggressive behavior, etc.. result of their own programming human genes. Says a amigo.NO
as I can fight against my genes, each time I become what I would not convert.
is it possible to go against the natural order?
god sent me a worker as a worker must die, my children must be workers. Why go against what I am?.
nap gave me (the truth is I'm going to play dragon shard ).........
0 comments:
Post a Comment