Re: Social Evolution

In a message dated 1/25/2006 10:34:49 AM Eastern Standard Time,
Dawsonzhu@aol.com writes:
I suspect this is largely an error that Dawkins makes,
but to his credit, he does recognize that biology does not encourage altruism.
Yes, we can observe behavior that conforms to our notions of "good".
But the question is actually, what is "good"? If "good" is identically
equivalent to "propagating my genes", then I'm surely in trouble, for
I have done no "good".
Human biology does encourage altruism. When the first human group attacked
another human group, the necessity for each of those groups to be altruistic
internally arose. Man has been creating ever more efficient and larger groups
ever since that first group conflict. The self sacrifice first arose in Vedic
religious texts as a device of warriors to give their lives for their group.

The Hebrew Bible tells us what is good. Life is good. To maintain the life of
the individual and his group is the primary object of the Hebrew Bible.

The Lord spoke to Moses and said, speak to the Israelites in these words: I
am the Lord your God. You shall not do as they do in Egypt where you once dwelt
nor shall you do as they do in the land of Canaan to which I am bringing you;
you shall not conform to their institutions. You must keep my laws and
conform to my institutions without fail: I am the Lord your God. You shall observe
my institutions and my laws: the man who keeps them shall have life through
them. I am the Lord.7

Good is identically equivalent to propagating my family, not my genes (which
were unknown even to Darwin).
This is why it is so imortant to understand the longevity of orthodox Jewish
blood lines and how their adherence to the Bible has maintained them.
rich faussette
Received on Wed Jan 25 12:06:48 2006