I know Sam Harris views morality to be objective because it is a product of evolution (to put it very simply), but if I were to accept that, then I'd also have to accept that all mental and social constructs are in some way objective. Or to put it another way, that objectivity and subjectivity overlap to a significant degree almost encompassing each other. I would agree that morality is a product of evolution and that every group of successful people have the same basic foundations for which different moral structure branch off from, but when you get into all the ways ethics can arise and be successful, then you see how subjective it is. In an environment where there are very few resources, it may make more sense to be a little more competitive with other tribes than cooperative. This may not be true all the time, but depending on the environment and different evolutionary adaptations, what is considered moral is more of a group personal view rather than an objective one. Or to put it another way, at our base, we are all utilitarians. Cooperation and empathy just happen to be a more successful behavior for most situations for our species, but on a different timeline, it could be very different.
@Pete Prisyazhnyuk what do you mean "morality from evolution"? Do you mean people looking at nature and then deciding what's moral from it or do you mean that morality cannot evolve? Because no matter how much you dislike the idea, morality is a product of evolution, both genetically and socially.
@@TheSkullConfernece Human evolution has made us such that we can sacrifice our consciousness in favour of our gene or our species as a whole surviving. Suicide might be sad to you and me but in the big picture it is just a way for "misfit" organisms to dispose themselves to save resources for the "fit" organisms with the same genetic structure.
Objective morality by evolution I don’t think works. Because evolution doesn’t necessarily keep you accountable for your actions. If morality comes from evolution, then all our morals come from evolution, including “evil ones.” If there is no god, there are no oughts, just is. Your not obligated by anything. Even if it is wrong, why listen to it if you can benefit more listening to your selfish desires.
Everyone has this logic, Americans when invading Iraq etc had it, Japanese when they imperially had it, the people in Palestine and that country invading it have it. Everyone in every era believes their morals objectively right, despite it changing a lot overtime if what you're saying is true, why do cultures,morals and values even change/evolve?
Another thought on AI. 🤔 Does humanity even possess the ability to program a set of rules for something MORE intelligent than us to just not kill us off? If this "being" (after our rule set) only gathers all of our knowledge and examiners it thoroughly. Wouldn't it just "become us" only more capable (and likely dangerous)? Can this AI being ever, "become more" than those that programmed it and the knowledge that went into it (Crap in, Crap out) ? 😔🙂😔🙂😔
Well such people dont survive easily. When you commit a murder like that, your tribe will isolate you and maybe the the acquaintants of the victim will try to murder you. So, as a result, people who are less likely to commit crime survives more and the other type dies out or are less likely to flourish.
Jordan peterson created 4 different accounts and disliked this vid...
Now, he made 3 more accts and did the same.
Now, made 3 more and did the same.
😂😂😂😂😂😂
I know Sam Harris views morality to be objective because it is a product of evolution (to put it very simply), but if I were to accept that, then I'd also have to accept that all mental and social constructs are in some way objective. Or to put it another way, that objectivity and subjectivity overlap to a significant degree almost encompassing each other. I would agree that morality is a product of evolution and that every group of successful people have the same basic foundations for which different moral structure branch off from, but when you get into all the ways ethics can arise and be successful, then you see how subjective it is. In an environment where there are very few resources, it may make more sense to be a little more competitive with other tribes than cooperative. This may not be true all the time, but depending on the environment and different evolutionary adaptations, what is considered moral is more of a group personal view rather than an objective one. Or to put it another way, at our base, we are all utilitarians. Cooperation and empathy just happen to be a more successful behavior for most situations for our species, but on a different timeline, it could be very different.
@Pete Prisyazhnyuk what do you mean "morality from evolution"? Do you mean people looking at nature and then deciding what's moral from it or do you mean that morality cannot evolve? Because no matter how much you dislike the idea, morality is a product of evolution, both genetically and socially.
That's why we are getting less violent and more cooperative, we are being less chimp and more bonobo (It's just my guessing)
@@TheSkullConfernece Human evolution has made us such that we can sacrifice our consciousness in favour of our gene or our species as a whole surviving.
Suicide might be sad to you and me
but in the big picture it is just a way for "misfit" organisms to dispose themselves to save resources for the "fit" organisms with the same genetic structure.
Morality is not a product of evolution. Instincts, impulses and drives are inherited from evolution.
@@danpenia219 Bonobos are a lot more violent than primatologists have admitted.
Biological (Neurological) factors
Psychological factors
Sociological factors
: : (Therefore)
Human Morality
Objective morality by evolution I don’t think works. Because evolution doesn’t necessarily keep you accountable for your actions. If morality comes from evolution, then all our morals come from evolution, including “evil ones.” If there is no god, there are no oughts, just is. Your not obligated by anything. Even if it is wrong, why listen to it if you can benefit more listening to your selfish desires.
The bad culture of east smart culture in the west fast food culture
Moral relativism this is. Hitler had this logic.
Everyone has this logic, Americans when invading Iraq etc had it, Japanese when they imperially had it, the people in Palestine and that country invading it have it. Everyone in every era believes their morals objectively right, despite it changing a lot overtime if what you're saying is true, why do cultures,morals and values even change/evolve?
Another thought on AI. 🤔
Does humanity even possess the ability to program a set of rules for something MORE intelligent than us to just not kill us off?
If this "being" (after our rule set) only gathers all of our knowledge and examiners it thoroughly.
Wouldn't it just "become us" only more capable (and likely dangerous)?
Can this AI being ever, "become more" than those that programmed it and the knowledge that went into it (Crap in, Crap out) ?
😔🙂😔🙂😔
Why should I care about killing are is she's simply a product of natural selection and chance? It's inherently makes me feel good
Define good.
U are sick
@@khumomatlakane2009 this is how morality is preserved. Bullying into the social norm
Do you even English?
Well such people dont survive easily. When you commit a murder like that, your tribe will isolate you and maybe the the acquaintants of the victim will try to murder you. So, as a result, people who are less likely to commit crime survives more and the other type dies out or are less likely to flourish.
Sam Harris makes perfect sense.
Yawn