I think Christianity corrupts and fucks up a lot of people. I find it funny how it’s always Christians pointing the finger. Does this look like their religion taught them right from wrong?
Well, yes mrdawn that is a correct assumption. Morality is genetic, housed in the prefrontal cortex of each human brain, imbued during the initial epigenetic washes, in utero, prior to birth…and honed over evolutionary time in all humans irrelevant of belief…we all have the same moral precepts. These genetic moral precepts we are born with, are good in nature, as it aids our species survival, to be good to fellow species, as opposed to killing fellow species…as promoting our species survival, is what our innate morality is based on in the first place. If there are anomalies, neurochemical or damage, to said area of the brain where our moral precepts are housed, immoral actions can occur…also outside agency of environmental pressure, like belief, can bastardise our good moral precepts, so having poor, ill defined or immoral beliefs, such as religion for example, can lead to immoral judgement and behaviour. Interesting that religion, that touts so called moral standards, is actually a pathway to immoral thoughts and actions
WTF? Who was that asshole that wrote, ‘Lord of the Flies,’ and fucked up my belief system forever?
That is as stupid as asserting that we are all born with a divine fire, with sin in our hearts, with the knowledge of God, morality is written on the heart of man, or other nonsensical bullshit
If morality is innate there is no excuse for immoral acts. If morality is innate, there can be no immoral judgments or behaviors, religious or otherwise.
[quote=“Scruffy, post:63, topic:2144”]
so called moral standards, is actually a pathway to immoral thoughts and actions
[/quo
Morality cause immorality and we are immoral because we have a morality gene? Does this really make sense to you?
WTF??? If this were the case there would be no wars, no theft, no murder, no rape. Give me a break!
2 Likes
Sorry you disagree. There is a lot of reading at the bottom of this wiki page.Neuromorality - Wikipedia
I agree with morality not being an innate faculty. Once one starts believing that, I think it may then just as easily be believed that evil is an innate faculty.
I will admit that this notion does make us appear nobler as a species, and makes the world seem comfortingly smaller by way of moral nativism. So, you know, there’s some up sides I suppose.
At best, morality is a byproduct of certain biological dispositions that evolved for other purposes, IMO.
So you don’t agree with genetic morality because, people will start to claim evil is genetic?
People have claimed evil is genetic, with terrible result.
Just look at children. They lie, they steal, they manipulate all for selfish reasons. Only once they have been taught certain lessons do they begin to accept that (for example) if they steal, they are depriving another of their goods.
We are taught certain rules, and if we are wise enough begin to understand the reason for reciprocal altruism.
1 Like
You have made the assertion that "Morality is Genetic.’ Not that genes can influence morality. Hell, anything can influence morality. A kid born with red hair, genetic, will be treated differently than a kid born with blond hair, genetic, and their morality will different as well.
Demonstrate a causal link between any gene and a moral behavior. This is as silly as phrenology
Demonstrate a direct link to moral behavor from genes.
1 Like
Tall kids, short kids, kids with obesity, the first-born, the second born, the first girl, all are influential in how one is treated by the family and others and contribute to their development.
I have to agree here. For those so predisposed, here is an interesting study which acknowledges a genetic connection, but as @Bluedoc has suggested, these connections are indicative of genetic adaptations only secondarily related to empathy. And as Cog has stated :
This is a bit of a long read but worth the time…
1 Like
[quote=“Cognostic, post:71, topic:2144”
Demonstrate a direct link to moral behavor from genes.
[/quote]
I presently can not. Although there are candidates, no present study has directly identified a specific gene.
There are quite a few studies that objectify genetic causality for moral proclivity. In studies like these, finding that correlations are stronger between twins than between siblings serves as evidence for genetic influence, since twins share all their genes and siblings only 50%. Here is one of those studies: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0956797621997350
Considering we have genetic markers for theory of mind and all emotions in the orbital and ventromedial prefrontal cortices, the same area, as our moral decisions originate, it is not a stretch to consider the same genetic predisposition for morality. That is where I stand presently. Until direct objective evidence is generated…we will not know…we only have objectively evidenced data pointing to genetic involvement. however, at this point, it is not an irrational stance for belief…as this belief is presently driving research in neuromorality.
Please read the study I provided a link for above. All you have provided so far is a claim of genetic causality, when at best the current research only indicates some correlation to specific areas of brain function. You have not offered any evidence of the mechanism by which specific genes could affect moral development.
Empathy is not in our Genes.
Already I am agreeing with the author.
My wish for you to do well, and to avoid suffering, is empathic regardless of where it came from and what you are currently feeling. (WOW - way out on a limb here. I may just want you to survive because you are my caretaker and I have no idea where my next meal will come from if you die. ) I want you to avoid suffering so that you are happy and generous with your money.
I reject the very first premise of the definition of empathy.
Yet you state it with so much confidence it appears to be fact.
This appears to be a recycling of the worn nurture versus environment. Do different races have different behaviors, and proven to be genetic?
Even if the motivation for empathy or for the consideration of another’s well-being originated in a selfish process, the end result still benefits beyond the self, which allows YOU to justify the selfish behavior…
1 Like
But what about Reverse Empathy? You know, like when watching “fail” videos? Makes you totally happy while laughing your ass off when some idiot wipes out horribly when attempting a stupid stunt. Sure, you can relate to their pain, but it’s just SO damn FUNNY.
1 Like
Humans by their very nature are Greedy. They behave empathetically to get what they want. The perfect example is the priest rushing to the bedside of a dying congregation member. You know why they do that right? They hope to be included in the will. This is where the big free money comes from. The one dollar two dollar shit you put in the collection plate each weekend pays the bills, the grounds upkeep and might put some food on the table. The real money rolls in as soon as people start dyng. But only if you are sufficiently empathetic to the suffering family members.
2 Likes
No, personality study shows different behaviours, but this does not invalidate genetic predisposition from birth. Evolutionary progression has two components…both a genetic predisposition, and an environmental pressure component. Environment influences our behaviours.
Yes I do. Mostly because of research based on the genetic components found to be associated with our emotions. Here is a short read:
Our emotions are generated in the same area as our morality is. It is reasonable to consider the same genetic driven function, and evolutionary process for morality…despite not presently having a direct mechanism of gene involvement.