> I don*t see how this theory would necessarily conflict with
theism.
> (Although as I type this I*m sure someone will tell me why it
does.) I
> appreciate your opinions and patience with my posts.
The conflict may appear when someone wants to apply this and
other models
(sociobiology in general) to human beings. In this case, all the
human
behaviors would be modulated intrinsically by this principles, what
excludes any sense of free will, for instance. How can you say that
I am a
sinner if I am just obeying what my genes are dictating? Or, in a
Dawkinian vernacule, how can you condemn a VEHICULE just
because the
REPLICATORS are bad?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
(Entomologist may find it interesting how this theory applies to
social insects.)
This book does mention how the theory applies to humans.
I see your point. This is what I have been thinking about. As
humans we have a degree of control over biological impulses. In
the case of altruism and this theory I can see a case where the
impulse is acceptable to human society and therefor "selected."
In the case of how the Handicap principle is applied to altruism in
humans I see what most might consider acceptable moral
behavior. If a fellow human being risks their lives for others, is this
not a respectable deed to say the least? Here too, the greater the
risk the higher human society rewards. Even if monetary or other
tangible rewards are refused human society would hold such a
selfless individual in high regard. This individual would reap some
kind of benefit even though the benefits might be less
conspicuous. Even in a case where certain death is imminent the
name of the individual would be long remembered, what they
stood would be remembered and the example they would set for
others could be considered a reward. The individuals descendants
might benefit too.
I see this principle, applied to altruism, as support to theism not as
an affront. I have heard altruism in the past as an example
disproving evolutionary thought. With all do respect to everyone, I
submit this theory as a correlation. Isn't this an area where we can
all agree?
Once again, I appreciate you comments and excuse the lack of
multisyllabic words in my posts . :-) As I recently told a friend, I was
allochthonous once but then I turned 36 recently and now I don't
move so fast.
Kevin