Nebuchanezzar
Banned
Nor is there any gene with trancends time or social context. Well...within reason.
we can't argue if you agree :-(Nebuchanezzar said:Nor is there any gene with trancends time or social context. Well...within reason.
I disagree. Why do you think diverse cultures, separated by time and space, tend to share similar morals and values?HNAKXR said:morals come from social conditioning.
therefore there is no abosulute code of moral values that transcends time or social context.
Love you Kwayera.Kwayera said:Morals are by no means solely a function of 'social conditioning'. It is in many ways influenced by our evolutionary biology and genetics, as well as society.
Sociobiology FTMFW.
*TRUE* said:Love you Kwayera.
Alright dear.scarybunny said:NO!
me love her first.
Isn't that what I was saying? Maybe I was just thinking of saying it. In any case, I want the kudos for introducing the idea to the thread plz.Kwayera said:Morals are by no means solely a function of 'social conditioning'. It is in many ways influenced by our evolutionary biology and genetics, as well as society.
Sociobiology FTMFW.
Your population biology arguement against abortion is fail though, because most biologists would agree that at a species level, humans will be better off with a steady, or even declining population. Given the high rate of gene flow in the modern world, there is no need for large localised communities, and we are rapidly approaching, if not exceeding the earth's carrying capacity.Nebuchanezzar said:Morality, imo, doesn't come from nowhere. It comes from where everything else that's a part of a human comes from - the human genome. Hence, morality = population biology!
Or better contraception. Or better sex education to promote USE of said contraception. Or, yknow, less sex. Or a culling, I'm sure it's just as likely to happen as the previous one.Graney said:So we need more abortions if anything, from a species perspective.
Oh please, that'll never happenGraustein said:Or better contraception. Or better sex education to promote USE of said contraception. Or, yknow, less sex. Or a culling, I'm sure it's just as likely to happen as the previous one.
'zactly, hence the culling comment.Kwayera said:Oh please, that'll never happen
In Ethiopia where it's poor or China where it's overpopulated: Yes.Graney said:Your population biology arguement against abortion is fail though, because most biologists would agree that at a species level, humans will be better off with a steady, or even declining population. Given the high rate of gene flow in the modern world, there is no need for large localised communities, and we are rapidly approaching, if not exceeding the earth's carrying capacity.
So we need more abortions if anything, from a species perspective.
This only came into the situation when a life was at stake, I thought. And even then, I still had my reservations about accepting that as fact.Kwayera said:His population biology also fails when it comes to reproductive value (a critical element of population biology), where adult females have more reproductive worth (and thus worth to the population in general) than her juvenile children.
Not at all. An adult reproductive female is ALWAYS of more reproductive worth (and thus worth to the population as a whole) than the immature offspring.Nebuchanezzar said:This only came into the situation when a life was at stake, I thought. And even then, I still had my reservations about accepting that as fact.
To quote you some Jared DiamondNebuchanezzar said:In Ethiopia where it's poor or China where it's overpopulated: Yes.
In Australia where it's neither: No.
what do you mean that you cant live here.Graney said:To quote you some Jared Diamond
"it's doubtfull Australia can even support its present population: the best estimate of a population sustainable at the present standard of living is 8 million people, less than half of the present population."
Australia faces some of the most severe environmental problems in the world.
Business and political leaders arguing we should increase our population to 50 million are extremely ignorant.