From: Rafal Smigrodzki (rms2g@virginia.edu)
Date: Thu Aug 08 2002 - 12:09:58 MDT
gts wrote:
These
behaviors of ours all serve to perpetuate our genes, even if not always our
own personal copies of them.
### I like to say it differently - the behaviors you mention resulted (but
not "served", because this implies teleology) in improved survival of those
who engaged in such behaviors, and the spread of the relevant genes.
-----
We might fancy ourselves to be "altruists" but
in reality we are merely the slaves of selfish genes.
### We might apply anthropomorhising terms to genes, but it doesn't help us
understand. Generally, mixing levels of explanation, trying to explain e.g
all of biology in terms of chemistry, or physics in animalistic terms, tends
to produce confusion. Genes have no volition, therefore they cannot be
selfish. Also, you cannot be a slave if you have the subjective feeling of
having a free will. Altruism is a phenomenon occurring at the level of
psychology, and although it may be dependent on the action of specific
genes, using genes (level -2) as units of its explanation is
counterproductive - we are much better off if we use data from analysis of
neural networks (level -1), introspection (level 0) and social theory (level
+1). We can predict more by using the appropriate conceptual level.
Therefore, if you use the same-level approach, altruism *is* what we fancy
it to be. Our introspection and communication with other humans allows a
definition of altruism, as behavior motivated by a concern for the welfare
of other humans (introspection is crucial here). Whether there are genes
which form us to act in this way is irrelevant to this definition.
Rafal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:15:57 MST