Darwinism and Altruism
‘If Darwinism is true, then we have no capacity for genuine altruism.’ Do you agree?
Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection has stood the test of time scientifically and it remains one of the leading scientific explanations on evolution via natural selection. There are different degrees of Darwinism which have emerged since that time, these being the non – materialist (dualist), the blank-paper (standard social science) and the gene machine (evolutionary psychology) Darwinism. To decide whether I agree or disagree with the above conditional, I will need to investigate the implications of each of these three degrees of Darwinism in order to see if any are valid and sound. Offer an explanation of any connection (premises) that bridge the antecedent of the conditional’ if Darwinism is true’ to the consequent ‘we have no capacity for genuine altruism’. This should ascertain whether the term ‘genuine’ can be applied to altruism in the light of all three Darwinists thought.
According to non materialist Darwinists (dualists) who accept many of Darwin’s ideas in terms of natural selection (competition between individual organisms or sometimes groups) but who believe that there are two kinds of substance, spirit and matter (natural and super natural). And it was God who created the vital spark, that kicked off evolution in the first place, consequently they would argue that altruism (to feel genuine concern for the interests of other individuals) comes from God (Human Nature after Darwin, J R Richards. p.192) Altruism is a central doctrine adhered to in most religions and it implies that God imbues mankind with the ability to choose to act unselfishly often in the belief that the faithful would receive a much greater reward later (Ibid p.193).
Therefore according to the non materialist Darwinism the premises for the conditional are as follows:- Premise1. If dualist Darwinism is true Premise2. A divine spark started creation Premise3 And God gave us
Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection has stood the test of time scientifically and it remains one of the leading scientific explanations on evolution via natural selection. There are different degrees of Darwinism which have emerged since that time, these being the non – materialist (dualist), the blank-paper (standard social science) and the gene machine (evolutionary psychology) Darwinism. To decide whether I agree or disagree with the above conditional, I will need to investigate the implications of each of these three degrees of Darwinism in order to see if any are valid and sound. Offer an explanation of any connection (premises) that bridge the antecedent of the conditional’ if Darwinism is true’ to the consequent ‘we have no capacity for genuine altruism’. This should ascertain whether the term ‘genuine’ can be applied to altruism in the light of all three Darwinists thought.
According to non materialist Darwinists (dualists) who accept many of Darwin’s ideas in terms of natural selection (competition between individual organisms or sometimes groups) but who believe that there are two kinds of substance, spirit and matter (natural and super natural). And it was God who created the vital spark, that kicked off evolution in the first place, consequently they would argue that altruism (to feel genuine concern for the interests of other individuals) comes from God (Human Nature after Darwin, J R Richards. p.192) Altruism is a central doctrine adhered to in most religions and it implies that God imbues mankind with the ability to choose to act unselfishly often in the belief that the faithful would receive a much greater reward later (Ibid p.193).
Therefore according to the non materialist Darwinism the premises for the conditional are as follows:- Premise1. If dualist Darwinism is true Premise2. A divine spark started creation Premise3 And God gave us
Bibliography: Richards, J R. Human Nature after Darwin, Open University Milton Keynes Barash, D. (1979) Socio-biology: the whispering within, Fontana/Collins. Dawkins, R. (1976) The Selfish Gene, Oxford University Press. Wright, R. (1994) The Moral Animal, Abacus.