Is morality unique to humans?

[Noaidi]

This may have been done before...

Is morality an evolved trait and present in a variety of species, or is it bestowed only upon humans from a deity?

This came about as a result of a brief conversation between myself and Danmac earlier today. I say that evidence is available that indicates moral behaviour is present in some non-human species and, as such, could not have been a divine gift to only our species.

Evidence suggests that moral behaviour is present in many social animal species and is a form of strengthening bonds among the members of a group. However, there is also evidence of trans-species moral behaviour.

I posted this link earlier, but it is more appropriate to this discussion:

Animals can tell right from wrong - Telegraph

Many theists may claim that moral behaviour is a god-given attribute to humans only. Is there any evidence for this?

 

[Falvlun]

There are numerous studies showing that various animals do display behaviors we often associate with morality:
Dogs have a sense of fairness
Blood sharing among bats (social cooperation)
Empathy in Chimps (consolation of a "loser" in a fight)
Just to name a few...

While these studies don't indicate a sense of morality in these animals (i.e., they are not thinking in terms of right or wrong), they show that certain "moral" behaviors do arise in animals and therefore, seem to provide some evolutionary advantage.

Thus, while humans most likely created morality as a concept, underlying, intuitive evolutionary behaviors informed some of the content of morality. Two forces driving the development of morality as seen in humans: evolutionarily derived tendencies and then cognitive ability.

With our brains, we were able to actually think about concepts such as right and wrong, and come up with reasons why this action should be performed and this action should not. Thus, more complex forms of moral behavior emerged in humans, such as true altruism. Additionally, our language allows us to pass these codes to our offspring, allowing them to be more complex (and incoorporate some of those stranger, seemingly non-advantageous laws, like "don't eat shellfish") than what mere DNA would be able to pass on.

 

[Reverend Rick]

My dog knows right from wrong. He plays rough with adults and cats but is very gentle with my grand babies.

He never has soiled my truck or boat but has made an occasional mistake in our home, (which was really my fault for not taking him out or listening to him ask to go out). When he did this, he will hide or hunker down.

When he does this, you would think I beat him, (I don't). He knows not to steal food from a plate, but the floor is fair game.

When he is too rough with the cats and they complain, he shows compassion for them. When the cats have come home with an injury, he has mothered them and licked their wounds.

Some of these things are learned through conditioning I grant you, but some thing have come naturally as well.

I have a border collie. They are said to be the most intelligent dog breed with German Shepherds second and Poodles third.

 

[Melvin.George]

This may have been done before...

Is morality an evolved trait and present in a variety of species, or is it bestowed only upon humans from a deity?

This came about as a result of a brief conversation between myself and Danmac earlier today. I say that evidence is available that indicates moral behaviour is present in some non-human species and, as such, could not have been a divine gift to only our species.

Evidence suggests that moral behaviour is present in many social animal species and is a form of strengthening bonds among the members of a group. However, there is also evidence of trans-species moral behaviour.

I posted this link earlier, but it is more appropriate to this discussion:

Animals can tell right from wrong - Telegraph

Many theists may claim that moral behaviour is a god-given attribute to humans only. Is there any evidence for this?

Oh you can take it a little further. In the zoo at Knoxville, TN a couple of years ago a matriarch monkey died. All the monkeys mourned for three days and most of them didn't eat during the period.

My german shepherd dog is eleven years old. She is extremely intelligent. She lives to please my wife and I. I tired of her running to the fence to bark at the neighbor's dogs and so I tied her(which she hates) for a few hours twice after she did it. Now it makes no difference how many dogs there are or how loud they are barking and growling. She never even pays them one minute of attention. I couldn't be more proud of her.

The Jews put that collection of fairy tales and myths together for control of the bands of savages which roamed the landscape taking what they wanted. It served it''s purpose.

 

[painted wolf]

Elephants have very well documented ritualized behavior with dead and dying herdmates that indicated an deep understanding of death.

Here are a couple of good books on the subject.
Amazon.com: Wild Justice: The Moral Lives of Animals (9780226041636): Marc Bekoff, Jessica Pierce: Books
Amazon.com: The Emotional Lives of Animals: A Leading Scientist Explores Animal Joy, Sorrow, and Empathy - and Why They Matter (9781577316299): Ph.D. Marc Bekoff, Jane Goodall: Books

You simply can't have a complex social structure without some form of moral behavior.

wa:do

 

[Melvin.George]

You simply can't have a complex social structure without some form of moral behavior

Oh yes you can. Have you never heard of Wall Street?

 

[painted wolf]

Oh yes you can. Have you never heard of Wall Street?

Perfect example of how lack of morality leads to a collapse of the system.

wa:do

 

[dust1n]

Wow.. everyone pretty much got here before on this topic.

Social animals have various senses of morals that applicable to their adapted circumstances. We all share a common ancestor, after all.

 

[Aquitaine]

How many animals do you see massacring each other needlessly to further their own agendas? How many animals beat their partners or rape thier own offspring? Or how many animals mutulate other's children in order to adhere to a bunch of superstitous lies?

I could continue, but basically what I'm trying to say is that I think Humanity is certainly the worst of all the species when it comes to "morality".

 

[Zadok]

How many animals do you see massacring each other needlessly to further their own agendas? How many animals beat their partners or rape thier own offspring? Or how many animals mutulate other's children in order to adhere to a bunch of superstitous lies?

I could continue, but basically what I'm trying to say is that I think Humanity is certainly the worst of all the species when it comes to "morality".

Hmmmmm - I do not think you have been around animals very much. Next spring, if there is a duck pond in your area - you ought to become more aware of their mating habits.

It is my general impression that there is more bias than thinking in this discussion. Pavlov demonstrated learning characteristics in intelligent species. At the same time humans are quite capable of developing anti-social and sociopathic responses towards others.

But let’s take this discussion in a direction we all can understand and ask a very simple question that does not require the intelligence of a rocket scientist. What do you think? If an intelligent creature (as is the case with most people) pursues an attitude of un-thankfulness towards what-ever gave them life demanding proof before giving any indication or credit that life is unfolding as a result of something providing beneficial possibilities. Is the logic of such thinking more or less apt to engender acts of kindness and appreciation (social responses) towards others?

Zadok

 

[painted wolf]

How many animals do you see massacring each other needlessly to further their own agendas? How many animals beat their partners or rape thier own offspring? Or how many animals mutulate other's children in order to adhere to a bunch of superstitous lies?

I could continue, but basically what I'm trying to say is that I think Humanity is certainly the worst of all the species when it comes to "morality".

just to add to the points that Zadok made.
Any species when crowded and struggling for resources will turn on itself. There is a balance between social cohesion and individual survival.

You also confuse social groups with the whole species. Two rival groups within a species that go to war are not necessarily being immoral.
Concern for the entire species is a novel behavior for our species (and likely absent in other species)... this novelty is contrary to the majority of our evolved morality.
We are in the middle of a very interesting evolutionary shift and it's bound to be messy.

wa:do

 

[Zadok]

just to add to the points that Zadok made.
Any species when crowded and struggling for resources will turn on itself. There is a balance between social cohesion and individual survival.

You also confuse social groups with the whole species. Two rival groups within a species that go to war are not necessarily being immoral.
Concern for the entire species is a novel behavior for our species (and likely absent in other species)... this novelty is contrary to the majority of our evolved morality.
We are in the middle of a very interesting evolutionary shift and it's bound to be messy.

wa:do

Well Said

Zadok

 

[Aquitaine]

just to add to the points that Zadok made.

Any species when crowded and struggling for resources will turn on itself. There is a balance between social cohesion and individual survival.

You also confuse social groups with the whole species. Two rival groups within a species that go to war are not necessarily being immoral.
Concern for the entire species is a novel behavior for our species (and likely absent in other species)... this novelty is contrary to the majority of our evolved morality.
We are in the middle of a very interesting evolutionary shift and it's bound to be messy.

wa:do

Of course animals will, but it's always purely for survival, and not for greed or power etc. Also, I really don't see this "concern for the entire species" in Humanity - it appears we're quite happy to just let others rot in poverty and warfare whilst we zap their own resources.

If you think of how much garbage we dump every year, how much pollution, how many human rights violations and wage slaves our economies are dependent on, how much debt we pass on to future generations etc - I really don't think we're looking after our fellow Humans.

As I said before, I have yet to see animals engage in pointless cruelty and violence just for greed, pride, superstition, or LOLs.

 

[Aquitaine]

If an intelligent creature (as is the case with most people) pursues an attitude of un-thankfulness towards what-ever gave them life demanding proof before giving any indication or credit that life is unfolding as a result of something providing beneficial possibilities. Is the logic of such thinking more or less apt to engender acts of kindness and appreciation (social responses) towards others?

I'd love to answer your question but I honestly do not understand it.

Please re-phrase it.

 

[ninerbuff]

This may have been done before...

Is morality an evolved trait and present in a variety of species, or is it bestowed only upon humans from a deity?

This came about as a result of a brief conversation between myself and Danmac earlier today. I say that evidence is available that indicates moral behaviour is present in some non-human species and, as such, could not have been a divine gift to only our species.

Evidence suggests that moral behaviour is present in many social animal species and is a form of strengthening bonds among the members of a group. However, there is also evidence of trans-species moral behaviour.

I posted this link earlier, but it is more appropriate to this discussion:

Animals can tell right from wrong - Telegraph

Many theists may claim that moral behaviour is a god-given attribute to humans only. Is there any evidence for this?

Haha! I would think that animals are more moral because you don't see them screwing their fellow species over a %.

 

[Aquitaine]

Haha! I would think that animals are more moral because you don't see them screwing their fellow species over a %.

Exactly.

LOL and that reminds me of that line from Aliens: "You know Burke I don't know who's worse, us or them - you don't see them screwing each other over for a ********** percentage!"

 

[painted wolf]

Of course animals will, but it's always purely for survival, and not for greed or power etc. Also, I really don't see this "concern for the entire species" in Humanity - it appears we're quite happy to just let others rot in poverty and warfare whilst we zap their own resources.

So you don't see any attempts to help prevent marlaria, aids, poverty, help those harmed by natural disaster and prevent wars in our world? None at all?
That is a shame.

If you think of how much garbage we dump every year, how much pollution, how many human rights violations and wage slaves our economies are dependent on, how much debt we pass on to future generations etc - I really don't think we're looking after our fellow Humans.

As I said... this is a novel concept and we don't yet have it widespread in the population. However there are those working to spread it and to work against the things you list.
Again, if you don't see those actions... I'm sorry for you.

As I said before, I have yet to see animals engage in pointless cruelty and violence just for greed, pride, superstition, or LOLs.

Oh they do... cats love to kill for fun and chimps use infanticide and cannibalism as a politically repressive action. Ducks and Dolphins commit gang rape... Dolphins kill Porpoises slowly and brutally for sport. Beavers kill particular trees because they don't like them... and on and on.
There is plenty of cruelty and violence in nature.

wa:do

 

[Aquitaine]

So you don't see any attempts to help prevent marlaria, aids, poverty, help those harmed by natural disaster and prevent wars in our world? None at all?
That is a shame.

Yeah I see them, but they're dilute compared to the amount of effort our species puts into needlessly destroying itself, it's host planet and other life forms.

Oh they do... cats love to kill for fun and chimps use infanticide and cannibalism as a politically repressive action. Ducks and Dolphins commit gang rape... Dolphins kill Porpoises slowly and brutally for sport. Beavers kill particular trees because they don't like them... and on and on.
There is plenty of cruelty and violence in nature.

That's fair enough, but then again they live in the rough and brutal hands of nature's mercy, we on the other hand (to some degree) have created our own "realities" with infrastructure and technology etc, that by comparison are a lot safer and secure.

Regardless, Humanity's contribution to needless cruelty is still immensly disproportionate compared to all other species, in my opinion. I really think we over-rate ourselves and our "Morality".

 

[painted wolf]

Yeah I see them, but they're dilute compared to the amount of effort our species puts into needlessly destroying itself, it's host planet and other life forms.

As I said this is a novel advance for our species... only a few generations. It's not going to change overnight.
We as a species are still very much tied to our old evolved "monkeysphere".

That's fair enough, but then again they live in the rough and brutal hands of nature's mercy, we on the other hand (to some degree) have created our own "realities" with infrastructure and technology etc, that by comparison are a lot safer and secure.

We are still bound by our evolutionary heritage... that includes our social behavior.
Our technology and living situations are advancing far faster than our biology is keeping up. This leaves us a lag time. Crowding is a stressor and the human social group "sweet spot" is from 150-200 individuals.

We are ultimately no more and no less moral than other species. I don't over-rate our species in the slightest.

We do however have the unique vantage point of being able to care for our whole species as well as other species. Socially evolving to where we are willing to do so, is not going to be quick or easy. Simply complaining about it isn't going to hurry it up.

wa:do

 

[Aquitaine]

We do however have the unique vantage point of being able to care for our whole species as well as other species. Socially evolving to where we are willing to do so, is not going to be quick or easy.

Never gonna happen. Sure, we have the possiblity to do that but boy is it improbable. I suppose most other species have the possibility to do that also, to some degree, but again it's very unlikely. Mean while we continue to destroy ourselves.

On the other hand, we not only have the possibility to engage in Genocide, but we've also actually done it - plenty of times.