Reply
Sun 10 Feb, 2008 10:06 am
I was watching a documentary about a family who went swimming in Newzeland. When they were swimming these dolphins started gathering round them, forming a circle. They didn't understand why these dolphins were doing this, it was only when the dad, looked into the water, and saw a shark swimming under them.
He then began to realize that the dolphins were actively protecting them from the shark. The dolphins were slapping their tails on the water, warning off the shark.
The dolphins, after forty minutes, swam away, because the shark had given up, and swam off.
It has been shown that the part of the brain that produces emotion in humans, has developed to such an extent in dolphins that they actually feel empathy towards other species.
Would the dolphins act, of protecting the humans, be considered a moral one? If I protected you from danger, that would be considered a moral act, to put my life in harms way, to try and say yours.
What could this mean for our "source", of morality?
Is it really God, even if you believe in God, I don't think dolphins believe in God?
I believe this is the second time you have posted this topic. Do you need a link to the first?
I just want people to acknowledge it.
With self awareness comes altruism, and rage. Creatures other than humans that express selfawareness, that is great apes, dolphins, elephants, and some birds all have been seen to express extra species altruism, sometimes even to humans. Unfortunately, human extraspecies altruism is largely unknown, consequently extraspecies rage is more common---consequently the concept of rogue actions---particularly by elephants and apes as they are also known to take revenge personally.
So it goes---
As for a higher power, many modern and primitive religions believe that all things have souls---. The more I read and experience I've come to believe that modern mans greatest attribute might be his arrogance.
Note the use of the masculine is not meant intentionally and also applies to the feminine.
Rap
I just think that what the dolphins did, how they made a decision to protect the humans, I think that has consequences on our conception of morality, and where some people believe it came from. Would the act of the dolphins be considered a moral act? When compared to say, one human protecting another human from a shark, putting his life in danger to save another life, is considered a moral act.
I think it shows from what the dolphins did, that what we call "morality", does not come from somewhere independent of us (God), but it comes from us, what we call morality is part of evolution, and not some all-powerful, all-good entity.
Someone define moral or morality for me. I never can tell how anyone uses the concept anymore.....
There were instances during World War 2 where downed pilots were pushed to the shores of islands by accommodating dolphins.
The basic concept of morality is what is to be considered a wrong or right act. Our whole conception of morality is based on the Bible, and the Ten Commandments, thou shall not kill etc. After the religious concept there are various other philosophical ones, utilitarianism, and different versions of what is essentially the same thing. Kantian and Aristotelian ethics are other versions.
I don't think that dolphins read the Bible.
Gilbey wrote:The basic concept of morality is what is to be considered a wrong or right act. Our whole conception of morality is based on the Bible, and the Ten Commandments, thou shall not kill etc. After the religious concept there are various other philosophical ones, utilitarianism, and different versions of what is essentially the same thing. Kantian and Aristotelian ethics are other versions.
BS There have been millions of ethical and moral people that haven't seen or known a bible. IMHO the stance that morality and ethics solely comes from the bible and the 190 Commandments is of judeo-xtian (with a small x) arrogance.
BTW almost all of the worlds religions include as one of their basic tenets a go;de rule---the Jains put it this way
Quote:Just as pain is not agreeable to you, it is so with others. Knowing this principle of equality treat other with respect and compassion.
I suggest you look at the
Ethic of Reciprocity as a start.
Rap
There is oftentimes confusion about ethics vs morality. Here is one way of separating the two...
Quote:A similar situation frequently happens when we deal with the concepts of morality and ethics. We must not allow ourselves to get wrapped up in giving one concept two names and then arguing about those names. We are dealing with two concepts and two names, so we should have little difficulty in distinguishing between them, if we define our terms beforehand. With this in mind, I will, therefore, define morality as religion-derived, and ethics as derived from first principles. The difference, then, is not a function of what, but rather of how derived. Ethical behavior (derived from first principles) can be moral within this context if it also can be derived from religious principle. Ethical behavior can be immoral within this context, if religion condemns it; and, of course, it can also be amoral if religion does not address it. Likewise, moral behavior can be ethical or unethical; and it can also be non-ethical, in the sense that it falls outside the purview of ethics.
Source
You clearly don't understand where I am coming from.
Alot of people would say, that the source of our morality, comes from the Bible and God. But what I am trying to say is that if dolphins can act "morally" as it were, then our conception of where "morality" (as we call it) comes from may be mistaken.
What I am trying to say is that morality is part of how evolved are brains are, and not a set list of rules some higher being has gifted us. And because it has been shown that the part of the brain that produces emotion, and empathy is highly developed in dolphins, and this is what caused them to act in the way that they did, I think that this shows that our conception, or at least the religious conception of morality, in terms of where it originated from is wrong.
I think that these days... only a very small percentage of people believe that morality comes from the Bible.
It is a good thing too-- I like to think that most people agree that killing (stoning) a new bride who doesn't bleed correctly on her wedding night is no longer the moral thing to do.
JPB--
Thanks for that excellent information.
Gilbey--
What is the evidence that more perfect ethics result from more evolved organisms? That's not true.
raprap wrote:With self awareness comes altruism, and rage.
ebrown_p
Are you suggesting replacing morals with ethics?
Did I suggest such a thing? And I don't think that you can have such a thing as "more perfect ethics", if you know what I mean.
We've had morals since we've banded together into multi-clan groups - at least to some minor degree. For tens of thousands of years there has been some level of morality and it has been changing since then. Ethics as associated with law are probably pretty well-defined. And, I imagine that many of us agree on most basic points of morality. But, even amongst religious folk dictated by the bible, morality differs from person to person.
Morality is a somewhat useless word given that context, doncha think?
echi wrote:What is the evidence that more perfect ethics result from more evolved organisms? That's not true.
Gilbey wrote:Did I suggest such a thing? And I don't think that you can have such a thing as "more perfect ethics", if you know what I mean.
I do not. What do you mean?
Yes, you did suggest it. I will underline the good parts.
Quote:What I am trying to say is that morality is part of how evolved are brains are, and not a set list of rules some higher being has gifted us. And because it has been shown that the part of the brain that produces emotion, and empathy is highly developed in dolphins, and this is what caused them to act in the way that they did, I think that this shows that our conception, or at least the religious conception of morality, in terms of where it originated from is wrong.
Am I wrong?
Good to see ya back, echi.
While I don't put it past intelligent critters to act ethically or morally, I think in this case to call the dolphins' act "moral" would be nothing more than anthropomorphizing an animal instinct.
Foreign travel taught me that. To see how another culture interacts is no different than watching animal behavior. Its different because their histories and paradigms are different.
So, I think some animals like dolphins, apes, and whales might have enough self-awareness that some type of selfless ethical code exists in their brains, but it certainly didn't come from religion. I think its possible that they are aware on a spiritual/soul level of the fact that all souls are interconnected and that is the type of morality we humans dance around all the time. We have been confused by religion and society. Maybe we should take a hint from our animal partners.
I honestly picture dolphins watching us and saying, "when will they get this morality thing?"