Morals in Evolution?

Question

1 There have been many false missing links in the past, such as Lucy. They have been disproved. I read on one A. that an evolutionist had written, that there are no actual missing links between us and apes found. So without a missing link how CAN Evolution be real?

2 If you are a real evolutionist, than there can be no known higher authority than man. Was Stalin right in killling so many innocent lives? (Remeber, man can make his own morals because there is no higher athority; God) How do you say he was wrong? What you say is merely your opinion compared to his.

I believe he was wrong because God says he was in the 6th commandment "Thou shalt not kill." but how do Evolutionists say he was wrong? I am honestly curious.

Please answer the question. Dont type stuff like im ignorant without at least writing an answer to at least one of the questions.

Pretty much every last thing people said i could have answered with a Biblical perspective. Man has conscience because God gave him one. Evolution has moral consiquences though. Why should one man tell another he is right or wrong, Stalin lead his society, so its his society versus ours?

Once again, i repeat that I believe stalin was wrong , what he did was a violation of the 6th commandment.

Rape deserved the death penalty under Biblical law, UFO. Is there a worse penalty than death?

Answer 1

there is no absolute right and wrong, morals are relative to society.

Answer 2

All people know what is right and what is wrong; your instinct is your higher authority. Even Stalin probably. However, Stalin chose to ignore that; he was almost certainly a psychopath in the medical sense and incapable of empathy.

Why would such an instinct evolve? Imagine a society that was composed of nothing but degenerate psychopaths. It would be an anarchy. While the individuals would be strong the collective would be weak. Now imagine that this group of savages annoys a group of more civilized people who have enough of a sense of morals to cooperate on things like banks and agriculture and building fortifications and armies...it is no great surprise that some psychopaths remain within cultures; preying on the weak has its advantages. However, if these genes become too common...

Your question about Lucy will not be answered because you show signs of not being in tune with your instinct and reliance on the Church for moral guidance. Were I to explain the things you don't understand and prove evolution, would you be a citizen or a Stalin without God?

Answer 3

I'd like to answer this in reverse.

2. From the perspective of an evolutionist, or at least someone who believes in the THEORY of evolution. Stalin was not more right or wrong than any other mass murderer or tyrant. Morally the act is reprehensible, but in terms of evolution insignificant. We are a species, regardless of color, nationality, religion, or any other limiting factor you may see fit to put on us. He cannot wipe us out.

1. What you refer to as the "missing" link can only be referring to some transition phase in the adaptation of humans to the surrounding environment. It is only missing because you think it is missing. There were literally thousands of changes that brought us along to the totally evolved state you think we are in now. (Note: evolution is a process, it doesn't stop simply because you think you are the "peak".) Many changes were made over many many years, e.g. loss of hair on the body, teeth structure, skeletal changes. The idea that you will find an example of every single change is silly. Either there always will be some "missing link" or there never really was one missing link there are gaps along a line that will never be whole.

Answer 4

You said without a missing link how can Evolution be real. You just contradicted yourself. Evolution is a fact, it really happened and is happening. There is no "missing link". (yes, lucy was real, she was about 2 million years old) It's hard for people to understand Evolution through natural selection because humans don't live long enough to see it first hand.

And Stalin was using Political Idealology to kill innocents. He was crazy and paranoid. The higher authority is the universe itself, man's purpose in life is to find purpose. No god or deity is going to save you from your mistakes. Humans kill because they don't know the difference and want someone to forgive them of their mistakes. And what does Evolution have to do with a dictator?

All life on this planet has a common evolutionary heritage and a common chemistry. Every life, from bacteria and slime to oak trees and apes and humans are all made of the same stuff. Evolution is so much better SCIENCE than Genesis.

Answer 5

Lucy was not disproven, and there are other finds from the same species. Why do you have to keep repeating a lie? Here is a recent article: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/09/060920-lucys-baby.html
Same species, much more complete skeleton. You guys just can't handle it can you?

And Lucy will be in Houston next year. The museum is beside itself to have her. I assure you they wouldn't be if there was anything not genuine about that find. I'll drive the three hours each way to see her.

Added: You still expect an answer when the question is predicated on a lie? There is a straight line of fossils with DNA to prove the direct ancestors back 3.5 million years. What the hell do you want? http://www.mnh.si.edu/anthro/humanorigins/ha/a_tree.html

Answer 6

1. You are wrong. All the transitional fossils are not false. There are some nuts going around trying to disprove fossil records, but 99% (actually higher according to Newsweek) of scientists know that the fossils are real.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucy_%28Australopithecus%29

2. Morals don't come from a book they come from within. Do you not kill because the bible tells you not to, or because you believe it is wrong? If you don't kill only because the bible tells you not to, then you might be missing the point of Christianity. If you don't kill because you think it is wrong, then can you not see why others would also feel this way regardless of religion?

Answer 7

Wow, now I realize you are serious... you really do believe this stuff. I thought before (in your previous question) you were just pretending to be stupid.

Well, to start with, most of what you said in #1 is either false or misleading. (I'm going to have to assume that you really are this deluded and believe what you say).

Lucy is a great example of a transitional fossil and there are more:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.html#morphological_intermediates_ex3

Check out example #3 especially, where you will see 12 transitional fossils.

Why are you saying this is a false missing link? She may not have been the direct ancestor of modern humans, but she is a good example of the branching that takes place in evolution. (Perhaps a good question here for creationist is "Why are no modern humans found in layers of this age)?


OK, for your #2... First you should know that MOST Christians ARE evolutionists. So many do believe in a God. [See "Finding Darwins God" by Ken Miller]

I disagree with many of the people here that morals have no base in evolution. Most of the baser emotions and behaviors are seen in especially the social mammals. They are most advanced in primates, especially Chimps and Bonobos. Social mammals that depend on one another for survival find it is their benifit to help one-another. [See "Primates and Philosophers: How Morality Evolved," by Frans De Waal].

They are right, however to point out that morality is partly a social system, but it's roots stem from evolution. [See "The Science of Good and Evil," by Michael Shermer].

Stalin was a man who killed for a poltical fervor that more closely resembles religion. We, as human beings have evolved to protect those we consider to be in our "in-group." That man can make his own morals is somewhat true. But they will always conform to his biology.

Religion however tells us that we can commit many kinds of horrors in the name of God (hence the Crusades, the Inquisition, and the killing of Native Americans). We know one thing, our morality does NOT come from scripture as the Bible has God himself killing over 2 million people.


So, now we come to my diliema... are you really "honestly curious" as you say you are? If so, you will respond to what I have to say to help clarify both our positions. If not, I can only assume that you are lying and you do not really want an answer.

I can tell you much more and go into much greater detail. But I do not want to waste it if you are just lying and do not want to know.

Answer 8

Evolution and morality have nothing to do with each other. The former is a biological process, the latter is social. There is no morality in evolution. A mother wolf protects her young because if she does not, they will not survive. The wolf could just as easily eat her young, but she doesn't, not out of morality, but because that is detrimental to the survival of the species. Human beings do not need to believe in God to understand that the preservation of life is essential to the survival of our species. Women who let their kids play in traffic lose those children, who do not continue on to produce grandchildren. A lot of what we do is about survival, not what is right or wrong. We are just animals, like all the other animals, and what you call morality, I call survival of the fittest.

Those who murder do so for complex psychological reasons, the result of heredity and environment (nature and nurture). While we might call this "immoral", it belongs in the realm of abberant psychology.

Answer 9

1. There's no scientific proof that Lucy was a "false" missing link. It's a circular argument--if you don't believe that evolution occurs then any evidence of evolution must be false.

2. Doesn't make any sense at all. Evolution does not explain morals, neither does it disprove them. Most (if not all) cultures, no matter what God they follow, believe that killing is wrong (and most if not all--including "Christian" cultures--do it anyway to some degree).

Answer 10

I don't believe that God gave morals to society. I believe that certain morals are common to mankind, therefore they made their way into religious writings. I don't think we need a higher power to tell us it is wrong to kill our own species because normal members of our species believe it is wrong to kill.

Evolution is selective breeding and natural selection, nothing more. When you question evolution surely you are only questioning the monkey-to-man theory, and not the entire Theory of Evolution. The Theory of Evolution has been proven time and time again. For example, the Dobermann Pinscher is the result of selective breeding. Just as its developer chose the specimans to breed, environment can choose specimans to breed, hence survival of the fittest.

No sane individual says that man can make his own morals since there is no higher authority, because there is indeed a higher authority. This authority is our collective unconsciousness which manifests itself in the law. Break the law, be punished. Religion is not relevant in this. Some laws have stricter punishments for offenders than biblical law, an example is the law regarding rape.

Answer 11

It is not about a higher power or not. We are concerned with how we(humans, life) came to be. It is independent of any diety.
But, morals are not based on the bible. I believe in Karma, and I just chose to be a good individual. I choose not to steal. I choose to rape......you know free will.
That evolutionist was most likely misquoted or not a true evolutionist. We are considered evolutionist because we believe in the evidence we have found. If we did not believe in our evidence, then we would not be called evolutionist. Yes, there are missing links, but these links(gaps) should not be filled with a theoretical, supernatural power that gives no logical explanation.