People want more resources for themselves and their families, but they also want to be able to life in a safe environment. By murdering, stealing, etc. you can get more resources (food, land, money, mating privileges , etc.) from others, but you also create a much more dangerous society. If you live in a society without social rules, there is no reason to be good to others, and no reason for them to be good to you. Even if you don't really want to hurt others, its the only way to survive because they are all trying to murder you and steal your things. However, if you live in a society where you can be pretty sure you won't be hurt as long as you don't hurt others, it creates a more peaceful society because people generally would rather have safety than the option of taking their neighbor's resources. Its less of a gamble, because even if you aren't directly punished for trying to take someone else's things, you aren't sure that you'll be able to, and the items you steal might just be stolen from you by someone else, so it would be a constant struggle just to maintain what you have.
2007-10-08 13:44:15
·
answer #1
·
answered by ? 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
enable me state this prevalent: i'm an animal lover, attempting to be a vegetarian, and confident that animals could desire to be dealt with humanely. in the start sight, human beings are patently no longer the centre of the universe, something so particular that during common terms they could have rights. If the two sensible and stupid human beings have rights, why no longer "stupid" animals? I admit that individuals can harm animals and that i do no longer go with to cut back those problems. i've got self belief that the answer of the very actual problems of animals do no longer require the invention of recent rights. There are different information on the thank you to unravel those problems. you will make the case that we only have a ethical duty to appreciate animals. even nonetheless, responsibilities are much less generic than rights and subsequently the temptation to apply the language of rights. yet as quickly as you enhance rights to animals you get on a slippery slope. Why no longer micro organism? Stones? Sand? ...
2016-12-14 11:37:10
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Murder is usually commited for a reason, letting the bad ones kill themselves, but it gets out of hand. Therefor, for the safety of people, people have taught murder being bad. Lying is tabood because people want to know things. It's jard to say this has helped the human species survive. Theft is tabood because of the fact that it gives what isnt deserved, but i have no clue about infidelity...
2007-10-08 13:34:33
·
answer #3
·
answered by dKM 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, the virtue in the taboo concerning cannibalism is self evident.
2007-10-08 13:37:33
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
It prevents constant war and allows people to live in a civil society.
2007-10-08 13:32:41
·
answer #5
·
answered by the Boss 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I'd say so, as very little positive things come from those activities.
Infidelity is more debatable though, that depends on how you look at it. Culturally that is.
2007-10-08 13:32:09
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
If they didnt exist we probably would not be here today confortably (and safely) answering each other silly questions. By the way.... where's my girl right now???
2007-10-08 13:33:21
·
answer #7
·
answered by 700BILLIONPOORER 3
·
0⤊
0⤋