Re: [asa] Random and design

On 11/27/06, Janice Matchett <janmatch@earthlink.net> wrote:
> At 07:17 PM 11/26/2006, Gregory Arago wrote:
>
> The irony, of course, is that 'expect the worst' is exemplary of
> Pim's logic
> and not Janice's, the latter who seems to tend towards 'hope for
> the best'.
> .. ~ Arago
>
> @ You're right.
>
> I do always hope for the best, but I never expect it --therefore,
> I'm never
> disappointed ------- but am sometimes surprised. :)
>
> ~ Janice
>

Here's another irony from the Wikipedia article cited by Pim.

"Selection will favour the detection of moralistic aggression and
"**distrusting** those who perform altruistic acts without the
emotional basis of generosity or guilt because the altruistic
tendencies of such individuals may be less reliable in the future"."

So much for trust to be the sine qua non of reciprocal altruism.
Recent studies show that it is not trust that drives reciprocal
altruism but strong reciprocity where there are large sanctions
imposed that punish cheaters and reward cooperation.

"Researchers call this tendency strong reciprocity: the willingness of
people to punish cheaters and reward those who cooperate, even at
substantial cost and with no foreseeable reward to themselves. The
pattern shows up consistently in laboratory games: Even when players
know their identity will be kept secret and are clearly told they will
never encounter their partner again, up to 50% still cooperate. And
when players are given a chance to spend some of their earnings to
reward those who cooperate or punish those who cheat, they do so
readily, although they have no chance to benefit from any behavioral
changes that may result."
-- Science, 20 February 2004: Vol. 303 no. 5661 pp 1128-1131

This brings us to Francis Schaefer. He theorized that non-Christian
societies oscillate between tyranny and anarchy. This has been proven
over and over, most recently in Iraq.

The Biblical quotes made by others suggests to me that so-called
reciprocal altruism may be the Pagan ethics referred to by Jesus in
those quotes. It also may explain why Schaefer is correct.

When there is tyranny cheating is strongly punished and thus
cooperation is "safer". Romans 13 also alludes to this function of the
civil government. When the tyrant is removed the sanctions against
cheating many times disappear. Ethics falls back to the next stage,
kinship selection. Thus, we get sectarian (read tribal) violence.

It is only Christian ethics that breaks this viscious cycle. That's
because Christians are to do good to non-kin even when they are not
proven to be trustworthy -- even when proven untrustworthy. We are to
bless those who curse us, go the extra mile, turn the other cheek,
etc.

Janice sums this up excellently so I will close with re-quoting her:

I do always hope for the best, but I never expect it --therefore, I'm
never disappointed ------- but am sometimes surprised. :)

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Nov 28 21:53:34 2006