Interesting theory. In my experience evolution is the most pleasant thing, because it is what creates positive change. More fitness means less sickness. Ethics and evolution are the same, ultimately.
-
-
-
Spoken like a true apex predator in his prime! The sorting hat calls you into the house of Fascism, oh dark one.
- 10 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Aren't self-preserving, self-spreading ethics the answer (and already somewhat of a norm)?
-
That is an open research problem. I wish I could help.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Also ethics is a wide field, and I don't see a need to choose between ethics and life; ethics is about right and wrong, and what you said is we might be forced to do the wrong thing according to some ethics. Ethics that doesn't properly weigh the fundamental value life is flawed
-
What is the "proper weight" of the value of life? For instance, I value my fundamental integrity higher than my life. Do I have flawed ethics? What about anti-natalism?
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
As for now, evolution has obviously favored each participant in my ancestral line. (Not sure about pleasant.) However, my personal ideological virus seems to favor ethics above survival of the genotype. So, is this really a choice or an 'evolutionary layer' above DNA at work?
-
Evolutionary selection for ideology is probably real to at least some degree. After WW2, the Germans were very deliberately deprogrammed from their radically racist ideology and given a humanist one. Neither fascism nor antifacism were accidental.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
What does “aligned with evolution” mean? Aligned with evolved human neurobiology?
-
No, with the question which genetic lineage can insert the largest number of offspring into the food chain at a position above or next to the competition.
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.