religion

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Originally Posted by RobotElvis [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

That is my point, what is being called morality in the animal kingdom is simply instinct.
To say that a pair of birds that mates for life is moral means nothing.
That is not morality, it is an instinctual display of duty and loyalty.
Someone said that this shows they are capable of love. In a way that's true.
But does it display the full range of human love? Would a male wood duck take a bullet from a hunter for his mate? No. His instinct of fight or flight kicks in and he takes care of himself.
But the moral human would lay his life down for his wife whom he loved. If he fled for his own safety like an animal he would be ridiculed as not being moral.

Originally Posted by RobotElvis [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

do apes feel guilt? Morality and empathy are far different. Empathy is an emotion morality checks and balances emotions.

And yes homosexuality is present in the animal kingdom. Your point?

Originally Posted by Barkingturtle [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Pure drivel.

[iruinedyourday]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[katrik]

Originally Posted by iruinedyourday [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Lol

[paulgiamatti]

The building blocks of morality are found in the animal kingdom which, if I might remind everyone, we are all a part of as a higher primate species. But to say a dog or a dolphin or a chimpanzee caring for its young or working in a group is behaving in a morally sound, ethically centered way is a bit silly. I'm not saying those things are immoral; quite to the contrary, they are clear indications that the early beginnings of morality were present in them before we ever existed.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Originally Posted by paulgiamatti [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The building blocks of morality are found in the animal kingdom which, if I might remind everyone, we are all a part of as a higher primate species. But to say a dog or a dolphin or a chimpanzee caring for its young or working in a group is behaving in a morally sound, ethically centered way is a bit silly. I'm not saying those things are immoral; quite to the contrary, they are clear indications that the early beginnings of morality were present in them before we ever existed.

Where specifically do you draw the line at what constitutes "morality" then?

[paulgiamatti]

Originally Posted by KagatobLuvsAnimu [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Where specifically do you draw the line at what constitutes "morality" then?

This is actually a good question which I don't think we have a solid answer to yet. I think as science progresses we will start to draw back the curtain on the subject and be able to definitively say at what point the primate brain began to develop emotional empathy and consistently apply it to behavior toward other sentient creatures.

[RobotElvis]

Originally Posted by paulgiamatti [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This is actually a good question which I don't think we have a solid answer to yet. I think as science progresses we will start to draw back the curtain on the subject and be able to definitively say at what point the primate brain began to develop emotional empathy and consistently apply it to behavior toward other sentient creatures.

Or it is easily explained by saying that humans are special creatures that did not evolve from animals, and are inherently morally superior to any physical creation. As I have thus far proved.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Originally Posted by RobotElvis [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But if animals can show moral traits, which are nothing more than instinct, why did humans evolve beyond animals in their morals? You say because of abstract thought, I agree with you.

But abstract thought is not a biological quality, it is a quality of the mind which is not physical.

This is a gap that cannot be bridged by biological Darwinian evolutionary models.

Originally Posted by RobotElvis [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Or it is easily explained by saying that humans are special creatures that did not evolve from animals, and are inherently morally superior to any physical creation. As I have thus far proved.

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[RobotElvis]

Originally Posted by paulgiamatti [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The building blocks of morality are found in the animal kingdom which, if I might remind everyone, we are all a part of as a higher primate species. But to say a dog or a dolphin or a chimpanzee caring for its young or working in a group is behaving in a morally sound, ethically centered way is a bit silly. I'm not saying those things are immoral; quite to the contrary, they are clear indications that the early beginnings of morality were present in them before we ever existed.

That is my point, what is being called morality in the animal kingdom is simply instinct.
To say that a pair of birds that mates for life is moral means nothing.
That is not morality, it is an instinctual display of duty and loyalty.
Someone said that this shows they are capable of love. In a way that's true.
But does it display the full range of human love? Would a male wood duck take a bullet from a hunter for his mate? No. His instinct of fight or flight kicks in and he takes care of himself.
But the moral human would lay his life down for his wife whom he loved. If he fled for his own safety like an animal he would be ridiculed as not being moral.

[leewong]

Originally Posted by RobotElvis [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

...

"That is my point, what is being called morality in the animal kingdom is simply instinct."

I would say in order to have morality you would have to be capable of abstract thought. Empathy and compassion are both shown in the animal kingdom. Humans base morality on these same instincts.

"But does it display the full range of human love?"

I am not sure why it matters. I dont think anyone here is trying to argue that birds possess a morality like humans do. As I said above...morality is something that requires both empathy and a mind capable of abstract thought. They most certainly possess empathy but lack something else.

"Would a male wood duck take a bullet from a hunter for his mate?"

Would a bee die for it's queen? Not sure what your example is suppose to prove other than you like to cherry pick.