Ask Me Help Desk - Self Sacrifice

Hello again:

I watch my cat wander around. I know my cat doesn't think. I wonder, then, how it chooses to go one way or another. It certainly doesn't do so because it thought about it. Indeed. My cat goes through life making choices - using free will to make 'em, and does very well.

Frankly, I think my cat has a free will, in the very same sense you mean OUR free will. I don't think intelligence, or the lack thereof, has anything to do with "free will".

We're intelligent. We go through life making choices - using our free will to make 'em. I don't see a difference, except that our choices should be better than my cats. And, that isn't true.

Bottom line, I don't think that you have to think in order to have free will. And, I don't think that HAVING such a free will, overrides your genetic programming.

excon

Exxon…You sure think a lot.:)

Free will is simply the ability to reason in syllogism I. e. a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion. An example is, "All birds have feathers, penguins are birds, therefore penguins have feathers."

That dear friend is the difference between you and your Cat!:D

And it also explains why people are capable of altruistic acts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

“Atheism has no explanation for... acts of self-giving and even self-sacrificing charity... Darwinian evolution cannot explain this kind of altruism: How does one who willingly dies for another pass on his or her genetic traits for the improvement of the species? No, defenders of atheism and Darwinism, if true to their convictions, should sneer at this kind of self-sacrifice as weak and pointless."Mark Earley

Is this a true statement ?

“Toddlers spontaneously offer toys and help to others and try to comfort people they see in distress.
The idea that the moral sense is an innate part of human nature is not far-fetched. A list of human universals collected by the anthropologist Donald E. Brown includes many moral concepts and emotions, including a distinction between right and wrong; empathy; fairness; admiration of generosity; rights and obligations; proscription of murder, rape and other forms of violence; redress of wrongs; sanctions for wrongs against the community; shame; and taboos.”

The Moral Instinct - New York Times

Would that make it Genetic? :)

I don't know . That seems to go in line with Excon's argument that humans act as a collective like the herd of water buffalo for their mutual preservation.

This debate on the nature of morality is as old as Plato .Steven Pinker's thoughts seem to go over the same old nature vs. nurture theory . To be honest ;the church long ago argued that souls had natural laws imprinted onto them. All he really is doing is leaving God out of the equation . But if not God's imprint then what ?

Excon's cat does nothing close to making choices nor does it take any responsibility for it's actions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dark_crow

Would that make it Genetic?

Actually it might: Behavioral Genetics

Insects' 'giant leap' reconstructed by founder of sociobiology

"Eusociality is a CHALLENGE for biologists TO UNDERSTAND because worker castes in eusocial species forgo individual reproduction but rear young that are not their own, a behavior that biologists label altruistic"

Evolutionists at war over altruism's origins - Independent Online Edition > Science & Tech

"Conventional Darwinian theory could not really explain why one individual should sacrifice its own life, and its precious genes, for the benefit of another individual, unless it could be viewed in terms of group selection, when indi-viduals do it for the benefit of the colony or the species."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It appears that these evolutionary atheist don't have an explanation for it either.

But neither kin nor group selection explains the train rescue example.

It is amazing to me that evolutionists study insects and "lower" animals to figure out why humans do the things that they do. Oh, that's right evolutionists would have us believe that humans are just like chimps and insects, just different genetic material in differing environments.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

I don't know . That seems to go in line with Excon's argument that humans act as a collective like the herd of water buffalo for their mutual preservation.

This debate on the nature of morality is as old as Plato .Steven Pinker's thoughts seem to go over the same old nature vs. nurture theory . To be honest ;the church long ago argued that souls had natural laws imprinted onto them. All he really is doing is leaving God out of the equation . But if not God's imprint then what ?

Excon's cat does nothing close to making choices nor does it take any responsibility for it's actions.

I believe we have evolved beyond the water buffalo stage, well most Humans anyway.:p
Cats do make choices; they don’t however make choices based on deductive reasoning.