Racism, Perfectly Normal?

[Tassman]

You can have it both ways, in chimpanzee groups the strong dominate and control the weak. In China today the ruling class exploit the underclass. In both cases cohesiveness is maintained.

You mean just as brutal dictators, kings and clan chiefs dominated and controlled the weak throughout most of human history. Not so different from our chimpanzee cousins really - but, unlike them, we have the intelligence to seek a better, more comprehensive way to maintain social cohesion.

Really, do the Chinese see the Uighurs as equals?

Did the Christian colonialists see the Native Americans or the Australian Aborigines or the Aztecs as equal? But they regarded the fellow members of their own Christian tribe as equal, even as they lynched blacks and destroyed ancient cultures. But we like to think we have moved on since then.

[seer]

You mean just as brutal dictators, kings and clan chiefs dominated and controlled the weak throughout most of human history. Not so different from our chimpanzee cousins really - but, unlike them, we have the intelligence to seek a better, more comprehensive way to maintain social cohesion.

Who is the "we" that seek a better way? China, North Korea. Muslims countries? African countries?

Did the Christian colonialists see the Native Americans or the Australian Aborigines or the Aztecs as equal? But they regarded the fellow members of their own Christian tribe as equal, even as they lynched blacks and destroyed ancient cultures. But we like to think we have moved on since then.

Not the point, being that the idea of equality is not universal nor can the atheist make a logical case that it is universal or absolute. And if you are saying that Christians did not always live up to the ideals of Christ then we agree!

[Tassman]

Who is the "we" that seek a better way? China, North Korea. Muslims countries? African countries?

Humanity in general has historically sought a better, more comprehensive way to develop social cohesion – e.g., ending discrimination in the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Not the point, being that the idea of equality is not universal nor can the atheist make a logical case that it is universal or absolute.

It’s an evolutionary trait (not a logical proposition) that we, as a social species, promote social cohesion and remove discrimination. It’s a survival mechanism.

And if you are saying that Christians did not always live up to the ideals of Christ then we agree!

How do you know you’ve got the “ideals of Christ” right now? Presumably the church-going Christian slave-owners thought they did too and were not wantonly disobeying the bible. Clearly, the religious views of the day make not a shred of difference to the organization of society. Historically, biblical texts have been understood through the lens of the culture and values of the period.

[Machinist]

"It’s an evolutionary trait (not a logical proposition) that we, as a social species, promote social cohesion and remove discrimination. It’s a survival mechanism." - Tassman


What do you think of genocide? Couldn't it be argued that that is also a survival mechanism?

[Tassman]

"It’s an evolutionary trait (not a logical proposition) that we, as a social species, promote social cohesion and remove discrimination. It’s a survival mechanism." - Tassman


What do you think of genocide? Couldn't it be argued that that is also a survival mechanism?

Certainly, for the tribes that perpetrate genocide against rival tribes – as is commonplace among our chimpanzee cousins. We like to think we have grown beyond that and aspire to the goals of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

[Machinist]

Certainly, for the tribes that perpetrate genocide against rival tribes – as is commonplace among our chimpanzee cousins. We like to think we have grown beyond that and aspire to the goals of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

So is it an evolutionary trait for a tribe to wipe out another tribe?

[Tassman]

So is it an evolutionary trait for a tribe to wipe out another tribe?

It is for our primate cousins, archaic humans and for early Homo sapiens tribal social units. Although ever decreasingly for the last, as tribal conquests merged numerous tribes into single units of big tribes (or nations).

[Machinist]

It is for our primate cousins, archaic humans and for early Homo sapiens tribal social units. Although ever decreasingly for the last, as tribal conquests merged numerous tribes into single units of big tribes (or nations).

Homospaiens continue to inflict violence on one another still today though. How do you explain this through an evolutionary lens? And are you saying that ultimately, our kind will evolve into a Utopia? And if we kill off all those who aren't down with our utopian vision, is this act of "cleansing" included in the evolutionary process?

[Tassman]

Homospaiens continue to inflict violence on one another still today though. How do you explain this through an evolutionary lens?

We have evolved as a social species via Natural Selection to maintain cooperative, cohesive social units. It’s a survival mechanism. Our cousins, the chimpanzees do it by the alpha male thumping disruptive miscreants. Whereas the more intelligent Homo sapiens have achieved social order via various means over human history including Law enforcement and the judicial system.

And are you saying that ultimately, our kind will evolve into a Utopia? And if we kill off all those who aren't down with our utopian vision, is this act of "cleansing" included in the evolutionary process?

Utopia? Cleansing??

Our tribal units have developed over the millennia from extended family units to tribal alliances, clans, chiefdoms, nation states, empires and ultimately what is in effect a global village requiring an international system of justice to maintain order.

[Machinist]

"Our tribal units have developed over the millennia from extended family units to tribal alliances, clans, chiefdoms, nation states, empires and ultimately what is in effect a global village requiring an international system of justice to maintain order." -Tassman

Is this evolution? I always think of evolution in the physical sense I guess.

Will we ultimately evolve into a Utopian world society?

[Machinist]

Ah yes, memes and memeplexes. The evolution of ideas.

[Tassman]

"Our tribal units have developed over the millennia from extended family units to tribal alliances, clans, chiefdoms, nation states, empires and ultimately what is in effect a global village requiring an international system of justice to maintain order." -Tassman

Is this evolution? I always think of evolution in the physical sense I guess.

Will we ultimately evolve into a Utopian world society?

We are becoming a world society, certainly but, sadly, not a Utopian one. Such a perfect imaginary society cannot exist in reality..

[Machinist]

We are becoming a world society, certainly but, sadly, not a Utopian one. Such a perfect imaginary society cannot exist in reality..

Why could it not exist in reality?

[seer]

Why could it not exist in reality?

Because evolution created us with some really nasty behaviors that are not going away anytime soon?

[Diogenes]

But it is a belief, everything we know are beliefs.

The statement "The sun will come out, tomorrow." Is not a value judgement.

Is there any other sense to you?

The common analogy is that of chess. Despite the rules themselves being subjective, once they are assumed, facts emerge.

. Second, a man born blind to display the glory of God in no way undermines the fact that he bears God's image.

But being born blind makes the man valued as a means to an end rather than an end in himself.

I don't make that distinction. God's moral law is grounded in His immutable moral nature.

The subject wasn't God's moral law but rather how humans have worth. Is God merely a product of God's Nature? If you want to say that God's moral valuations are mere products of God's Nature that's fine. I can just as easily say my moral valuations are based on my neurological wiring. A psychopath could say the exact same thing. We could further say that because humans are social creatures, that will affect moral valuations of humans.You're going down a rather reductionist rabbit hole.
.

Except it is transcendence and certain - absolute.

You keep missing the part about the ontological objectivity which is fundamental to realism.

What does that have to do with worth?

Biology, as part of reality, is independent of the fickle opinions of man. Worth is dependent of desire and other mental aspects. For example, the worth of food is dependent on a desire to live or the absence of some other overriding valuation like a fast, hunger strike, or being a good boy in the case of delayed gratification in dog training with treats.