Is the conscience the origin of what is right and wrong? What is the origin of the conscience via evolution? Do other animals show conscience in altruistic behavior and why did we develop a conscience? Can the conscience control and override genetically programmed physical instinct?
Is the conscience the origin of what is right and wrong?
The origin, no. The factory where both occur, yes.
What is the origin of the conscience via evolution?
Being sympathetic to evolution, for a second, I would say the origin in [human] evolution was the moment humans regarded the conscious balance, the necessity, apart from their natural environment.
Do other animals show conscience in altruistic behavior and why did we develop a conscience?
I still cannot wrap myself around the concept of animal consciousness v bootstrap instinct. Seems a contradiction in terms.
Can the conscience control and override genetically programmed physical instinct?
Perhaps. The override seems evident in humans, since they have the ability to consider, actively or passively right/wrong. Often times, humans override their instinct to satisfy the conscious mind and [the key word here] enabling control of the mind, through a kind of self hypnosis almost. That is how the override is accomplished. Some call it convincing or conviction. Forcing a decision and causing instinct to subside. Some could even go so far as to say sin, since the natural instinct would not want to do a thing, yet the conscious mind needing to do, overrides yet again.
Interesting stuff TD.
Thanks Twenty. Interesting response, thank you.
What do you believe the origin of right and wrong are if not the conscience which tells you to go against or with instinct? If it took us humans to separate ourselves from other life to develop conscience, why do other animals display behaviors that appear to require conscience that are still in the natural environment?
I do not understand bootstrap instinct. Evolution explains instinct as anything to further individual survival and survival of the fittest, many animals display atruistic actions which put others ahead of themselves for their individual sacrifices to further the species. This is seen in instinct as simple as ants having slaves to build the colony. If only for individual selfishness, why would any species work together?
Could the override not also be seen in other life? If a parent is hungry with the personal instinct and need to eat, but feeds their young first by altruism and maternal instinct, wouldn't this be override of individual instinct? How would maternal instinct develop without conscience or altruism in other life?
TruthDebator, are you ever going to write a hub? Why do you choose to ignore that aspect of hubpages?
Thanks IntimatE. I am working on a few hubs, but I don't like them enough to finish and publish. I also think I can learn more in forums than I can writing a hub. My hubs don't debate me. lol
I see. Well I look forward to reading them when you do decide to publish. However, don't you think that you bring on confrontation from other hubbers, simply because you are not a published author? Most people are ridiculed in society for spouting this and that, and having nothing to back up their opinions too. That's like a voter not voting, but, complaining about who was elected. What grounding do they have to participate in those types of discussions? The answer is quite simple- no vote no opinion.
I think you ask very interesting questions. I think you bring much to the forums. However, when you post a topic about "right or wrong" I find that extremely ironic. Here you are- no hubs, nothing- and yet you expect us published hubbers to respect your sincerity to hosting a logical debate about the origins of right or wrong. Are you kidding me? That's is funny stuff right there. Your presence in these forums is questionable to me. Not that you don't have a lot to offer, because you do but because YOU have nothing in writing. You have NO published articles. YOU are reaping the rewards of what us published hubbers have help to build, and you want to talk about right and wrong. That's funny.
Respect is earned Truthdebator. Just some food for thought.
Conscience is because of Self consciousness/awareness.
whosoever possess self awareness would posses a conscience or a knowledge of good and evil or right and wrong.
The conscience maybe purified, when this occurs then that one becomes perfect and no longer sees good and evil but all as good. This perfection takes them above death itself.
The conscience that still sees in double , good and evil , is still subjected to death.
Thanks. What about altruism in other animals? Some kill one another on a habitual basis within their species while some hardly ever or never kill within themselves. If conscience is only available to us, why do not all animals have the same programmed genetic instinct lacking a conscience or altruism instead of displaying different instinct and choice?
Never heard animals debating right and wrong
And you are trying to pack several questions into one, I do not assume that altruistic behavior is right as you do. Neither I do assume it is wrong. Nor I make any assumption about causal relationships between conscience and altruistic behavior.
lol Thanks. I didn't say that. But some do have further maternal or altruistic instinct compared to others. Why would they evolve altruism without a conscience or without choice? Why would they evolve more order among themselves to further survival if they didn't recognize helping instead of hurting one another was beneficial to their survival?
Please give 10 examples of altruism in other animals and explain how you know what these animals are thinking, and how they are making decisions based on human values.
Thanks. Again, not interested in taking surveys. Many people pay others to take surveys. Please explain how instinct in "survival of the fittest" would further the population of a single species without "altruism" within the species? If a species has no altruism or instinct not to eat one another, wouldn't most of the species be extinct? Isn't it choice not to eat one another?
Sorry - your assumptions are interfering with my ability to understand your bombardment of questions. I am not aware of any examples of animals exhibiting altruism. Please give me 10 examples of this behavior that you have observed and explain why you believe this behavior is based on human perceptions and feelings such as altruism. Or do you just not understand how evolution works? Because you seem to be saying that animals do not eat their own species and this is altruistic? LOLOL
I don't know why cows do not eat other cows. Sorry LOLOL
You have a point TruthDebater. For example, a dog's loyalty to its master and so on would appear to be based on something 'deeper' than mere instinct. There's a bond that can only be described as love.
And love comes from which source?
Anyone of them or a combination of them
If you ever owned a Labrador you would know it is based on love ... of food!
Thanks. You do not think it's altruistic to not eat within the species when facing hunger? Isn't there choice not to eat one another when hungry when it may be easier than hunting/catching prey?
Why should it take 10? Is this the scientific survey method?
If you understand this better, please feel free to explain your belief. Why is it not altruistic not to eat your own species?
Sorry - I don't understand - you are claiming that animals do not eat their own kind because they have a selfless concern for the welfare of other members of their species? How do you know what animals are thinking? Can you read their thoughts?
You are the one making the assumptive claim. Please explain why you have made this irrational assumption and give me 10 examples of this behavior - or is the fact that they do not eat each other enough proof for you?
Guess you did not read that book I suggested and learn about all the species that do eat their own kind either. If you had - perhaps you would have understood that evolution is about the species, then you may grasp why it is usually not a good thing for the same species to eat each other and has nothing to do with your belief that animals have the same emotions and perceptions as humans.
Are the ones that eat their own kind "evil," Marine?
Please stop making personal attacks, thanks. When someone is often offended and draws prebiased assumptions and conclusions, it's no longer scientific belief, it is religious belief.
How is that a personal attack Marine? Your assumption is clear.
Nevermind; religion, in my opinion, is deeply rooted in the sub-concious mind if not in the conscious mind of Atheists Skeptics Agnostics. I think you will agree with me; that is why they spend so much time writing on religion forum.
I read an article; it mentions that dogs not only think they see dreams also.
What is human mind? Do the animals have mind? Please
I heard a prominent evolutionary biologist say that one of the last remaining problems to solve in his field is the origin of altruistic behavior.
Thank You Philip. I don't think Mr. Knowles got that memo.
LOL Who was this prominent evolutionary biologist and where did he say this nonsense?
Thanks. Everything in evolution is already fully explained right? lol
Much of it - yes. Sorry - Can you answer the questions please.
Thanks. I will answer your questions when you gain manners and stop defending your belief with so many assumptions and ridicule. Why would I start a thread to answer a survey? I started the thread to ask questions and learn answers, not to be ridiculed by an atheist defense of evolution. I apologize my questions are offensive to you.
I asked because I do not understand. How do you know what animals are thinking? Why is not eating your own kind "altruistic," and how do you know that this is the reason they do not eat their own kind - because they are altruistic rather than to propagate the species?
You do not want answers Marine. if you did you would not be repeating yet another variation of the same theme.
Odd how every single one of your threads - regardless of whether I am in it - degenerates into a bombardment of questions, the answers to which you ignore completely in favor of another barrage - all of which demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of evolution.
What does a lion know of "right or wrong"?
Thanks. You are still making personal attacks. I will respond when you learn to read my name.
I do not know your name. I only know the various user names you hide behind. What is your name?
This is clearly NOT a personal attack - Mark is asking a perfectly clear and thought out set of questions in relation to your nonsensical post which is - as he points out, simply a bombardment of questions, some of them pretty stupid questions that might be expected from an overactive child. This is a personal attack, what Mark is doing is asking questions that you don't want to answer because they defeat your trivial and slightly dim argument.
Thanks for your personal perspective in explaining his lack of manners. He has called me by a different name multiple times, a sign of disrespect and personal attack along with making assumptions while accusing me of making the assumptions. If you have anything meaningful in relation to the topic rather than defense of your fellow believer, please feel free to add. The way I see it, only an overactive child lacking manners would call anothers questions stupid. Which of his questions defeat my argument and what is my argument? I would like to know. lol
TD, some people can't (or won't) help it and the fact that you get annoyed by it will only trigger more name-calling and disrespect from them. I got my share of it when I started posting in forums and I can honestly tell you the best thing you can do is ignore it. If you take it personal, you will lose track of what is being discussed to deal with people that won't change the way they approach you, no matter what you do. You will find there are people who will ignore their comments and answer your question.
I don't dislike Mark or any HP skeptic or agnostic. I think we can all benefit from their perspectives, although I agree they tend to be harsh at times. Without them HP forums would not be as interesting though.
You could always apply my outlook to atheists...be careful though. Not if you're easily insulted.
I find baiting them fun, antagonizing is also fun. But I don't believe in Satan so....
See a couple are really sweet...all logical and stuff, but others take everything personally. Then you have the tattle-tales and groupies.
Thanks for putting things into perspective Klara. You make a good point, I appreciate it. I think part of my problem is that sometimes I think they do want normal conversation and still give them benefit of the doubt pretty often. If I don't give them the benefit of the doubt, I look as biased and small minded as them for not recognizing what they have to offer. I guess I will just have to be more selective on who I trust is here to offer conversation rather than the controversy.
It is what it is TD. You just have to learn how to take the good with the bad.
Small minded - wonderful personal attacks Martine. Condescending also - excellent - this should get a reasonable response. If you had ever responded to me with anything but condescension and rudeness, and responded to any of my answers - I would show you some respect. But - you do not. How many threads the same as this have you started and every time from ignorance and an unwillingness to learn anything.
Oh well - I tried to answer - now you attack me again. You think because you attack me as an aside to another user it does not count?
Thanks, Please stop the personal attacks. I wouldn't want you to get banned again, I enjoy your company. You seem to disrespect me on every thread first calling me the wrong name, then pointing out all the areas you believe I am ignorant in. Maybe change your tact and display manners and I will take you seriously?
How did you try to answer me asking me to take a 10 question survey?
If you want to answer me, please answer what you believe the origin of right and wrong if you don't believe it's an evolved trait that is also in other animals?
Right and wrong are human perceptions. I do not understand what you mean. Why would you ask questions unless you were ignorant of something?
Do not understand how this was a personal attack, Marine. Maybe that is why you have been banned permanently?
That would be a tall claim; I don't agree; as that would logically the end of evolution. It is an ongoing process unless stopped by the Creator-God Allah YHWH. And that end has not yet come.
A lot of people make the mistake of considering the impulse to survive as in itself "selfish" which implies a moral judgment. Life forms survive....that is what they do. An altruism behavior may have evolved because it has helped the group or family survive. I may be mistaken but I think that the argument over whether evolution operates only through individuals is controversial.
Thanks. I don't think it is surviving that is seen selfish, I think it is sometimes the choice in how to survive that can be selfish or altruistic. I agree lifeforms are built to survive, but many survive by different means and behaviors, not the same instincts. I agree with you that evolution is the addition of others in the individuals environment, but for a new instinct to start, only one individual choice or mutation has to happen.
Here is my "out-there" response to your question - Animals have a Spirit as humans do. The amount of Spiritual energy that animals have is not as large as the one used by a human. However, as Spiritual energy develops it will go through a process of evolution itself. Let's say that the same amount of Spirit needed to fill a human body could be divided into let's say... 4 dogs, or 4 dolphins, or 4 horses (rather intelligent animals that think and behave emotionally very similar to us humans) but it can also be distributed into 15 birds, or 100 butterflies, etc. What I'm saying is just an example and the numbers are not meant to be taken as correct. This, of course, suggests that animals that have a more altruistic nature and seem to have a more evolved conscience are closer to our Spiritual energy level than others. That's my point of view anyways. You can crucify me now! But I still love you all!
You have explained things in a nice way; who will crucify such a lady?
Haven't heard that one before. No really - never heard it. Not when I was five, not ever in school and never from a religionist.
You are so wonderfully creative, I don't know how you managed to come up with that. Know less, Knowles. Wonderful - demonstrates the level of ingenuity you are capable of very effectively. Well done.
@lp - Yes - I was banned for a week for telling some one that writing hubpages teaching people how to make money at hubpages when they then announce in the forum that they have not made any money is lying. This is a personal attack apparently. Oh well.
Mark, that was intentional I swear! LOL I laugh now because I did it without noticing. I'm sure you get it all the time. Sorry! Welcome back.
Oh Mr. Knowles, one of my favorite atheists...glad your back.
Mr. Knowles you got banned for calling someone a lier! Ridiculous.
Klara, please work on your baiting skills.
Thanks Klara, I don't wanna ridicule or crucify you lol. I enjoyed your thoughts. You could be right. I don't wanna sound like a ridiculing skeptic, but is there any books that can give evidence or observation to there being spirit or soul?
Origin of Right and Wrong?
Everybody now come to the topic of the thread; please
Thanks for getting things back on track. I think the origin is altruism from witnessing other animals take care of one another to further and stronger the species. I do not know the origin of altruism or why it is a choice of conscience rather than a selfish individual determination to survive.
I have a more interesting question. How does a hubber gain 9 followers with no hubs written?
I think even the wolfs care about their kind.
So now the truth is told....., hm very interesting indeed.
Thanks. Leave it up to the atheist to play games after I answer his question even after he continually lacks manners. Hard to see why some are biased to believe some atheists have no morals or decency?
OMG, its YOU! The science project guy!!! OMG!
Oh....., oh, oh, oh, oh-oh.
Why are you writing in the forums, when you've been banned? You have permission to do this?
If a mouse is in a cage with a shocker, everytime the mouse goes to a certain part of the cage, it gets shocked. The mouse learns the "right" places to go and the "wrong" places to go in the cage of where not to get shocked. If the mouse went to the wrong place, it would get shocked. The mice like humans memorize and choose the right and wrong places to move or behave.
It really seems like when I ask a question that gives evidence to choice rather than genetic determinism, the atheist materialists all come running at the same time to protect their belief of genetics with no choice.
I find it interesting Darwin didn't speak much of animal altruism in origin of species. But everything in evolution is already fully understood and known right? lol
I kinda think you want the scienceology forum.
Thanks. It is personal belief of where the origin of right and wrong came from. I don't think science knows or has stated the origin of right and wrong. I also haven't heard science claim only humans know right and wrong. But I have heard materialist atheists claim humans are the only ones that know right and wrong.
It is out of the scope of the Science to determine "right and wrong"; there would have been no science if there would have been no concept of right or wrong. It existed before the tool of science was "invented" by the humans with a restricted perimeter beyond which it cannot work; as is with every tool.
The concept of right or wrong has been instilled in the human psyche evolving gradually as designed by the Creator-God Allah YHWH.
science is what you and me exist because of...now instead of thanking fellow humans who made life easy for you and me ,you want to thank something which still is not able to prove itself?...this is not gratitute man...
coming to concept of right and wrong..a professor's hand was chopped by some muslims because they thought their peigambar was being insulted...a church in florida is going to burn quran.....now why does religion not teach what is right to these guys?...
Evolution is all about survival. What is right today would be wrong tomorrow depending on the expediency and need for the survival of the majority of the human race. What's your conscience got to do with it? Golda Meir once said "Don't be humble,your not that great".
There is no talking to the OP - he cannot even define what "right" and "wrong" actually mean and will just pound out questions attacking proven evolutionary biology.
Right and wrong are simply human concepts to transmit an idea to other humans. There is nothing inherently right or wrong in anything.
Evolutionary speaking - I suppose you could say that eating another member of your species is "wrong," if it weakens your species' ability to reproduce and successfully propagate but if you are eating weaker members to get rid of a trait - that would make it "right," as far as the strength of the species goes.
Nonsensical thread really. The assumption that animals do not eat their own kind because they are "altruistic," and know it is "wrong," is first of all incorrect, because many animals do exactly that (including humans in the past or when desperate enough) and there are plenty of other reasons for it I can think of that make a lot more sense than being able to read animal's thoughts.
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.