Dolphins are cute and all, and while I'm sure they are "smart" in the animal way, they obviously aren't "smart" in the human way.

Otherwise they would have figured out how to get out of the friggin ocean by now...

It's that alpha male thing... catnip for the ladies. :D

Two bulls on a mountaintop looking over a cow filled pasture below.

The young bull looks over to the elder and says, "I'm going to <i>run</i> down there and "nail" the first cow I get to".

The elder bull turns to him and replies, "I'm going to <i>walk</i> down there and "nail" them <b>all</b>".

CC, nathan's dad, can societal norms be said to be artificial or outside nature? Didn't humans and their society evolve, and didn't nature and biology through natural selection dictate what behaviours would be successful, and hence determine what is best for survival? If these ideas or theories are artificial, where did they come from? And which behaviour if either goes against nature, monogamy or promiscuity?

Taz, good question.

I would say it's a little of both. Some societal norms such as being against murder, rape, incest, cannibalism, beastiality, etc. I would say are in the best interests of society. They promote an orderly and peaceful society and thus improve the lives of all.

I think monogamy is also in the best interests of society. Some would say you can impregnate many more women without monogamy and thus create more offspring, but I would submit that studies have shown that children born to single parent homes don't do as well and thus aren't as "beneficial" to society as a whole. Of course there are exceptions, but the general rule applies. Human children develop best when there is a male and a female pair to raise them. That's not really up for debate, it's been proven many times. Of course there are exceptions. Some single parents do very well, some heterosexual couples are horrible parents, some homosexual couples are great parents. I'm talking about the overall trend for the entire species.

Now some other societal norms, especially some of the more modern ones, are more because it is what our minds say is "right" instead of what is strictly best for the species. Example would be modern medicine. We have preservation of life as a societal norm. That's great as an idea, but it actually could be said to be weakening our gene pool over time. We keep many patients alive through medications, etc. to the point they are able to procreate and pass their genes on. Things like cystic fibrosis, muscular dystrophy, etc. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying I think we should let all these people die. I'm just talking in strict terms of what would occur without modern medicine. Many of these people would die prior to passing on their genes and those genes would be selected out of the population. So in some ways we are working against ourselves.

that's just crazy talk...very baaaaaad thinking.

Why'd you single out beastiality Nostatic??

Hrm....LOL

Nathans Dad, how can you seperate what our minds say is right from what is best for the species? If our sense of right and wrong is a gift from evolution to help preserve the species, then moral decisions are simply natural selection in operation.

I remember watching a PBS-type show where they analysed this topic. Specifically they did some research on the shape of the male's member. The shape of the, er, head, has significant variation between mamals, and is linked to how monogamous the species is.

The shape of human members lied somewhere in the middle of the continum leading the scientists to conclude that we're wired to not be 100% monogomous.

Taz I can separate it because we, as humans, have developed the capability to rise above (somewhat) our basic survival instincts. We do things for reasons other than what nature has programmed us to do. How do you explain art? Art has absolutely no function in survival except to make us feel good when we look at it. Same for music. Same for poetry. How the hell is synchronized swimming helping us survive?

(dupe due to database hiccup)

Remember, the appendix and a taste for artery clogging foods, and a predisposition for certain addictions was a "gift from evolution" as well. ;)

Natural selection is just not be fast enough to keep up with societal evolution. Even now, what is considered "right" in US society is different from the Middle East (or even some places in Utah). Like the clothes we wear, society is a layer on top of our basic human hardware/software that allows us to more quickly adapt to changing conditions.

The animal kingdom is not a good model for human behavior and evolutionary and inherited human behaviors are not necessarily right just because they are "natural".

-Chris

What Moses said. R. Dawkins´books, especially 'The Selfish gene', are among the most interesting books I have ever read.

Not sure they are compatible with a Christian view however. I buy it though. Makes sense. Religion does not. But then, making sense is not the main point with religion anyway, I guess. Would be interesting to hear a believer comment on Mr Dawkins work.

Moral. When did that evolve in man ? What is moral ? Do apes have some sort of primitive moral, in the sense of behaving toward other members of the species in a certain way ?

Apparently, latest findings suggest we parted from the apes on the evolutionary tree more recently than we had thought.

Monogamous ? I am a firm believer that most of the general behavior of man, in everyday living, still is governed by a primitive core sexual competition drive. Albeit overshadowed by todays 'moral' code, which in itself is an evolution in order for a large society to work without to much anarchy. Homo sapience in its original 'package' would probably not have been monogamous. Although during periods of the evolution and perhaps in certain environments that strategy could have proved to be an advantage and hence practiced.

How do you know that we're the only one who has developed this? Without being able to communicate, we don't know if other animals are in fact doing the same within their societies...

Rising above basic survival instincts is not moving outside of nature. Our sense of right and wrong (morality) is an evolutionary tool that has helped the species survive and thrive.

I disagree that natural selection is not fast enough to keep pace with societal evolution. They must be the same. We are not existing outside of nature, our existence is the product of nature, as is our society. The evidence of evolution was of different mutations evident in species of birds on different islands, why wouldn't societal differences in seperate cultures be the same indicators?

If evolution produced morality, and morality causes us to naturally surpress desires, why would it be unnatural to surpress a desire to be promiscuous?

That's only part of the equation. The lure of the alpha male is the quality of his alpha sperm and his capacity to sire little alpha offspring. Keeping the alpha home at night is a whole 'nother challenge.

CC of course animals have their own societal rules, whales hunt together (at least Killer Whales do...I've been to Sea World so I know), lions hunt together and the men eat first, whales talk to each other in whalesong, etc.

What does that have to do with the discussion though?

The point is that some societal norms exist for the good of the species and some exist because our quest for the common good rises above instinct. It really doesn't matter whether other animals have a form of societal rules, I don't think anyone would argue that human have the most advanced form of society on the planet.

Thinking too much to justify ones beliefs keeps shrinks in business.

Being attracted to the Alpha male means he'll get her wet. Society often contradicts that impulse leading to the male that will buy her diamonds.

wet vs diamonds = tension

Just bang the best in town and worry about talking together in a week. Banging because we're friends gets boring fast.

Just because we can reason and weigh the outcomes of persuing our desires does not mean we can rise above our instincts. Natural selection has dictated the structure of our societies, bodies and sense of right and wrong, it's all instinct.