Poll: Can Science Improve Moral Awareness?

[painted wolf]

I've been pretty consistent in my posts on this thread and I will repeat; morality is a symbolic language communication mechanism that solicits social cooperation, no different in its effect as pheromones used by insects. [/qutoe] Do you understand fixed behavior patterns vs. behavioral plasticity?

How can science tell me if female genital mutilation is immoral? If it doesn't pose a risk of societal extinction its ok?

wa:do

 

[painted wolf]

This isn't about Chaos theory... it's about science as a tool for determining morality.

wa:do

 

[painted wolf]

Behavioral Genetics [/qutoe] I was hoping for some primary literature...
For example: PLoS ONE: The Number of Cultural Traits Is Correlated with Female Group Size but Not with Male Group Size in Chimpanzee Communities
PLoS ONE: Chimpanzees Share Forbidden Fruit
PLoS ONE: Altruism in Forest Chimpanzees: The Case of Adoption

wa:do

 

[Beyondo]

This isn't about Chaos theory... it's about science as a tool for determining morality.

wa:do

The point of siting chaos theory is that morality is about social organization. As I've stated in previous posts; today science is merely the impetus for social agreement, why we agree is about power, economics and soliciting cooperative effort. Science does not determine morality. Despite the sophistication of human social dynamics it still conforms to mathematical principals just as insect societies do.

 

[Beyondo]

Behavioral Genetics [/qutoe] I was hoping for some primary literature...
For example: PLoS ONE: The Number of Cultural Traits Is Correlated with Female Group Size but Not with Male Group Size in Chimpanzee Communities
PLoS ONE: Chimpanzees Share Forbidden Fruit
PLoS ONE: Altruism in Forest Chimpanzees: The Case of Adoption

wa:do

Look over the site and towards the lower end of the page and you'll find some interesting info.

 

[painted wolf]

Science does not determine morality.

Which is what I've been saying all along.

Despite the sophistication of human social dynamics it still conforms to mathematical principals just as insect societies do.

Game theory and the like yes... but we have a behavioral plasticity not seen in insects, making our behaviors harder to mathematically predict.

Otherwise there would be no prisoners dilemma.

wa:do

 

[Beyondo]

Which is what I've been saying all along.

Game theory and the like yes... but we have a behavioral plasticity not seen in insects, making our behaviors harder to mathematically predict.

Otherwise there would be no prisoners dilemma.

wa:do

The whole point of chaos theory is the interaction of the individual components are not predictable but the overall structure or order of a system emerges from the chaos.

 

[Beyondo]

but we have a behavioral plasticity not seen in insects

You can not predict how an insect will handle any specific situation; terrain, size of obstacles, size and type of food sources, etc are all unpredictable. Insects handle these situations through neurological adaptive systems that learn from experience.

 

[painted wolf]

Look over the site and towards the lower end of the page and you'll find some interesting info.

the only primary research paper I found was about potential genetic ties to addiction... The one from 2000 about genetics and violence was clear to point out that genetics alone was not the cause for violent behavior.

wa:do

 

[painted wolf]

The whole point of chaos theory is the interaction of the individual components are not predictable but the overall structure or order of a system emerges from the chaos.

An order... but that order may or may not fit a particular cultural definition of morality.... so once again, science can not tell us if a behavior is moral or not. I can not do a scientific test to tell me if driving a car is a moral action.

You can not predict how an insect will handle any specific situation; terrain, size of obstacles, size and type of food sources, etc are all unpredictable. Insects handle these situations through neurological adaptive systems that learn from experience.

Except that I can... Insects of the soldier class will always react to the attack pheromone with aggression. Males will always attempt to copulate with something giving off the sex pheromone. (many plants and predators make use of these fixed behavior patterns)
Baby gulls will always peck at a red dot... and a parent warbler will always feed a chick with a bright red mouth.

wa:do

 

[Beyondo]

An order... but that order may or may not fit a particular cultural definition of morality.... so once again, science can not tell us if a behavior is moral or not. I can not do a scientific test to tell me if driving a car is a moral action.

Once again; I never said science determines morality but it can explain what morality is doing as a behavioral trait and how it conforms to mathematical principles to form social organizations.

Except that I can... Insects of the soldier class will always react to the attack pheromone with aggression.

In most human societies of the past males make up the warrior class and will attack if borders are breached or motivated by the ruling class to seek out and conquer for the acquisition of territory, natural resources and slaves. Today with the advent of technology females can do many of the front line work that men would normally do in soldiering and while most modern societies have removed the warrior class, they have reorganized into income classes where most of the soldiering is done by the lower income class. These soldiers will attack if their borders are breached or if motivated by ruling parties whose motives are idealogical vigor.

Males will always attempt to copulate with something giving off the sex pheromone. (many plants and predators make use of these fixed behavior patterns).

Humans have very strong sexual drives that is controlled by hormones. As with all primates, sex is always more than just about reproduction and so to with humans, it determines leadership roles, strengthens social alliances and is used as a commodity for the exchange of resources or favors. The sexual drive in humans is so strong that if isolated for prolong periods with the same sex they always demonstrate bi-sexual behavior, just as other great apes, despite cultural taboos that forbid it.

Baby gulls will always peck at a red dot... and a parent warbler will always feed a chick with a bright red mouth.

Human mothers will always try to breast feed their offspring until the child is capable of eating solid food , if the mother is incapable of providing milk or is not comfortable about breast feeding she will always try to find a substitute.

These are very predictable behaviors of human beings.

 

[painted wolf]

Once again; I never said science determines morality but it can explain what morality is doing as a behavioral trait and how it conforms to mathematical principles to form social organizations.

So we are discussing totally different subjects.

In most human societies of the past males make up the warrior class and will attack if borders are breached or motivated by the ruling class to seek out and conquer for the acquisition of territory, natural resources and slaves.

Unless they defect or decide they don't want to participate.

Today with the advent of technology females can do many of the front line work that men would normally do in soldiering and while most modern societies have removed the warrior class, they have reorganized into income classes where most of the soldiering is done by the lower income class.

You are making my point for me.... we are behaviorally plastic. Insects have fixed behavior patterns.

These soldiers will attack if their borders are breached or if motivated by ruling parties whose motives are idealogical vigor.

Again, unless they decide they don't want to.

Humans have very strong sexual drives that is controlled by hormones.

I never said anything to the contrary. Your point is?

As with all primates, sex is always more than just about reproduction and so to with humans, it determines leadership roles, strengthens social alliances and is used as a commodity for the exchange of resources or favors. The sexual drive in humans is so strong that if isolated for prolong periods with the same sex they always demonstrate bi-sexual behavior, just as other great apes, despite cultural taboos that forbid it.

Again your point?
Unlike insects, humans can choose to not have sex. Male insects will respond to sex pheromones without thinking even if it is obvious that the source of the pheromones is not a female of the species. This is a fixed action pattern...once the stimuli is received the insect has no option to not behave in a specific way.

Human mothers will always try to breast feed their offspring until the child is capable of eating solid food , if the mother is incapable of providing milk or is not comfortable about breast feeding she will always try to find a substitute.

Except the ones that leave their children to die in dumpsters.

These are very predictable behaviors of human beings.

Except that they aren't... there are exceptions to each and every one of your examples.
There are no exceptions with a fixed action pattern, it is a behavioral reflex.
Human examples include infant grasp reflex and sucking reflex... human smiles are also genetically programmed behaviors.

wa:do

 

[painted wolf]

Here is a pretty good resource on fixed action behavior patterns.
Ethological studies of sign stimuli and motivation

wa:do

 

[Beyondo]

Unless they defect or decide they don't want to participate.

You fail to understand why they would defect or not participate and in fact the defection or not participating in war is the exception to the rule of human social organizations.

You are making my point for me.... we are behaviorally plastic. Insects have fixed behavior patterns.

Again you fail to understand the benefit of plastic behavior and why it is there. humanity is no more capable of willing its emotional reactions than insects that respond to pheromones! Such emotional processes are genetic and have fixed patterns that motivate behavior. In fact even the conditioning processes of human beings at the neurological level operate identically to the neurological processes that are found in insects.

I never said anything to the contrary. Your point is?

Human beings are motivated by emotional states that are the impetus for behavior and the creation of novel inventions inclusive of moral behavior, one such emotional state is sexual drive.

Unlike insects, humans can choose to not have sex. Male insects will respond to sex pheromones without thinking even if it is obvious that the source of the pheromones is not a female of the species. This is a fixed action pattern...once the stimuli is received the insect has no option to not behave in a specific way.

No differently than humans that are motivated by emotional reaction, as to which behavior is invoked is more complex than insects but the point here is that more sophistication doesn't make for the better survivor.

Except the ones that leave their children to die in dumpsters.

And bees will reject a queen bee by starving her to death for reasons unknown. The female that dumps her child in the trash is the exception to the rule, that you site that as some kind of choice based on a healthy rational person is ludicrous!

Except that they aren't... there are exceptions to each and every one of your examples.

No they are the general rule of human behavior what you site are the exceptions.

There are no exceptions with a fixed action pattern, it is a behavioral reflex.
Human examples include infant grasp reflex and sucking reflex... human smiles are also genetically programmed behaviors.

Plastic behavior hasn't proved to be the superior survival trait and in fact when it comes to abstract thinking the advantage isn't more adept for social organization.


The ultimate conclusion that you fail to see is that fixed action pattern is what makes human beings intelligent, neurons have very fixed behaviors, that the complexity of such neurological patterns can create insect societies just as easily as human societies should give pause to those who believe humanity to be the better survivor of the animal kingdom because of its social organization founded in morality. It should also give pause to those that believe that human behavior is beyond biology...

 

[painted wolf]

You fail to understand why they would defect or not participate and in fact the defection or not participating in war is the exception to the rule of human social organizations.

No I'm not.
You were the one insisting that humans are totally predictable and that the "soldier class" would always react the same way that insect "soldier class" would.

Again you fail to understand the benefit of plastic behavior and why it is there.

:biglaugh: Hardly, I'm the one who brought it up!

humanity is no more capable of willing its emotional reactions than insects that respond to pheromones!

You try to have sex with anything that remotely piques your intrest? Are you posting from prison?

Such emotional processes are genetic and have fixed patterns that motivate behavior. In fact even the conditioning processes of human beings at the neurological level operate identically to the neurological processes that are found in insects.

Yes, our neurons fire in the exact same way. But we have very different organization and orders of magnitude more cells. This provides emergent properties that insects do not have. Among them are behavioral plasticity.

Human beings are motivated by emotional states that are the impetus for behavior and the creation of novel inventions inclusive of moral behavior, one such emotional state is sexual drive.

Yes, but are able to control that drive to a very large degree... again, unless you automatically try to have sex with anything that produces female pheromones regardless of other factors?

No differently than humans that are motivated by emotional reaction, as to which behavior is invoked is more complex than insects but the point here is that more sophistication doesn't make for the better survivor.

Where the hell did I ever suggest otherwise?

And bees will reject a queen bee by starving her to death for reasons unknown. The female that dumps her child in the trash is the exception to the rule, that you site that as some kind of choice based on a healthy rational person is ludicrous!

source please? I've never heard of that behavior. Granted while I am a biologist I'm not an Entomologist.

No they are the general rule of human behavior what you site are the exceptions.

that is the point I've been trying to make! Humans are behaviorally plastic and we have exceptions... there are animals who have fixed action behavior patterns and will always act in a certain way to certain stimuli. :banghead3:

Plastic behavior hasn't proved to be the superior survival trait and in fact when it comes to abstract thinking the advantage isn't more adept for social organization.

I never said it was superior, I never would say that and I never will say that! Seriously .... where are you getting this? :sarcastic

The ultimate conclusion that you fail to see is that fixed action pattern is what makes human beings intelligent,

WTF....

neurons have very fixed behaviors,

They have fixed functions... they send action potentials along axons... nothing more nothing less.

that the complexity of such neurological patterns can create insect societies just as easily as human societies should give pause to those who believe humanity to be the better survivor of the animal kingdom because of its social organization founded in morality.

I agree, humanocentrism is a terrible thing. All social species have "morality".... Science however is not capable of telling us if a particular action is moral or not... simply how and why it happens.

Now please stop reading extra into my words. I do not feel that humans are superior... that biology can't tell us why we behave why we do or any of the other idiotic things you have been suggesting.

It should also give pause to those that believe that human behavior is beyond biology...

Behavior is an emergent property of our biology. This says nothing about the "morality" of the action. Culture and morality are emergent properties of behavior. It isn't limited to any species.

wa:do

 

[painted wolf]

Here is a link to a useful discussion on the issue PZ Myers: Sam Harris v. Sean Carroll : Pharyngula

wa:do

 

[Yerda]

Your stomach is not adapted to hard core meat eating. Eating meat of a vegetarian animal is one thing, the meat of a carnivore is quite a bit harder on the digestive system.

I was not aware of that. Where did you learn it?

 

[Beyondo]

No I'm not.
that is the point I've been trying to make! Humans are behaviorally plastic and we have exceptions... there are animals who have fixed action behavior patterns and will always act in a certain way to certain stimuli. :banghead3:
wa:do

What I'm trying to point out is humans are just as predictable and in fact there is recent news of scientist predicting decisions of human beings before they make them by using MRI scans and noting what parts of the Brain are active as the specimen is exposed to the stimuli.

The use of neurons in animals, inclusive of humanity, is to provide degrees of plasticity so as to provide real-time adaptive capabilities. You have stated that human choice is beyond biology and that just isn't the case. When humanity invents a novel behavior that is a moral standard it doesn't necessarily mean it is a good survival trait, but the brain chemistry of humanity is triggered through the exchange of symbolic language and so moral issues are social organizational processes driven by genetic expressions that form brain anatomy that create the behavior of suggestibility.

 

[painted wolf]

What I'm trying to point out is humans are just as predictable and in fact there is recent news of scientist predicting decisions of human beings before they make them by using MRI scans and noting what parts of the Brain are active as the specimen is exposed to the stimuli.

Actually that just showed that decisions were made on a subconscious level prior to the individual being aware of it... He had the ability to see the subconscious decision but he couldn't predict the subconscious decision.
It does demonstrate that a lot of what we think are conscious processes of decision making are automated... but it doesn't mean that they are 100% predictable. In this case it was to use the left or right hand... not exactly groundbreaking decision making.
You are reading a beyond the actual study.

Caveats remain, holding open the door for free will. For instance, the experiment may not reflect the mental dynamics of other, more complicated decisions.
"Real-life decisions -- am I going to buy this house or that one, take this job or that -- aren't decisions that we can implement very well in our brain scanners," said Haynes.
Also, the predictions were not completely accurate. Maybe free will enters at the last moment, allowing a person to override an unpalatable subconscious decision.
"We can't rule out that there's a free will that kicks in at this late point," said Haynes, who intends to study this phenomenon next. "But I don't think it's plausible."
That implausibility doesn't disturb Haynes.
"It's not like you're a machine. Your brain activity is the physiological substance in which your personality and wishes and desires operate," he said.

Read More Brain Scanners Can See Your Decisions Before You Make Them

The use of neurons in animals, inclusive of humanity, is to provide degrees of plasticity so as to provide real-time adaptive capabilities. You have stated that human choice is beyond biology and that just isn't the case.

No, I haven't... please stop reading into my answers what isn't there... it is getting farking frustrating.
I said it was an emergent property of our brain function.
I said morality is an emergent property of social behavior.

When humanity invents a novel behavior that is a moral standard it doesn't necessarily mean it is a good survival trait,

Again, stop adding a layer of bull scat to my words.
I never implied that it was. :banghead3:

but the brain chemistry of humanity is triggered through the exchange of symbolic language and so moral issues are social organizational processes driven by genetic expressions that form brain anatomy that create the behavior of suggestibility.

No kidding Einstein...

wa:do
​

 

[Beyondo]

No kidding Einstein...

I knew you'd like that one.