Re: Adam and Eve, from Re: PBS Evolution (and Keith Miller)

From: Brent Foster (bdfoster@shrinkweb.com)
Date: Fri Sep 28 2001 - 18:28:21 EDT

  • Next message: Jonathan Clarke: "Re: Ken Ham"

    --- "bivalve" <bivalve@mail.davidson.alumlink.com>
    > wrote:
    >Just commenting on one aspect of Brent's scenario
    >
    >>This selfishness, working to his benefit from an earthly perspective, would have been a selective advantage, increasing in proportion in future generations. Sinful individuals would quickly replace all others. In this way we all inherit the sinful nature of Adam.<
    >
    >Traits do not have to be fully advantageous to spread.

    True. It would be difficult to try to quantify how advantageous an inheritable selfish trait would be. I guess in this scenario it needs to be so advantageous that not having it would mean leaving so few offspring that the line dies out completely.

    >In particular, selfishness promotes short-term gain but long-term loss. Thus, even from a purely biological perspective it may not be a good idea.

    I'm not sure we can say what the net effect of selfishness would be in terms of fittness. Of course selfishness does not preclude altruism which may also be a selective advantage. No doubt people are capable of both.

    There was one very interesting piece from last night's "Evolution" brodcast on "The Mind's Big Bang" segment. It was shown that humans are unique in their ability to see things from another's perspective. Apparently children above the age of 4-5 aquire this ability. On the other hand no primate of any age, regardless of other signs of intelligence, has this ability. I had not heard this before. If true, then I think the ability to view events and situations from another person's perspective has profound implications in terms of moral accountability.

    Brent

    _____________________________________________________________



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 28 2001 - 18:29:08 EDT