From: rhinoceros (rhinoceros@freemail.gr)
Date: Mon May 03 2004 - 09:45:07 MDT
[simul]
Objective basis for compassion
1. All organisms base decisions on their own point of view. They use current input about their environment, combined with past experiences, to make decision about courses of action. This process is necessarily "objective" - with the organism at the center of the decision making process (BASIS).
[rhinoceros]
Fair enough, but notice that this "objective" decision-making procedure as described can be different for each individual, hard to follow, and hard to be communicated with others. In other words, it is subjective. Then, the argument becomes "The subjective is objective". In a sense it is. But caution is needed, not to mix the conceptual-cognitive view with the mechanical non-justificational view, or else both words will lose their meanings and the whole argument will become mute.
Also, since our perception of the world is grounded on our senses, experience, and categorizations which in turn are based on our genetic makeup, it is not that simple to define the essential term "objective" in a clear and operational way. A good attempt is to definine objectivity through intersubjectivity, but this is not trivial either.
[simul]
2. Even if a person claims to be embarking on a philosophy which takes into accounts "nonselfish" viewpoints, this, itself, is a necessarily selfish decision - motivated by the experiences and research of the person (1)
[rhinoceros]
This is along the same line of reasoning. Both compassion and lack of compassion, supernatural beliefs or lack of them, can be shown to be objective in the same way. I have no doubt that selfish motives can be ascribed to a mother who jumps into the fire to save her child, or to a warrior who is willing to risk getting killed for honor or for the sake of his/her community.
On the other hand, we have Evolutionary Psychology which makes a good enough case that many of our behaviors are not really based on cognitive processes -- that cognitive theories come afterwards to give a justificational explanation. When it comes to altruism, EP claims that it has been hardwired in us at a pre-cognitive level just because those who had it survived and/or mated better.
Words are tools of categorization for particular contexts and they are adopted or dropped according to their utility. At some point, it is possible that the "selfish unselfishness" view will provide us with more utility than the traditional "selfish vs unselfish" dichotomy. For now, I think EP has made a better case on this particular topic, while retaining the concept of unselfishness.
[simul]
3. The foundation of Objectivism is that each of us is motivated by our own pursuit of happiness and our own reason. This is equivalent to (1).
[rhinoceros]
Heh. I wonder... when you say Objectivism with a capital "O", do you mean what I think you mean...? Ayn Rand, that is?
By the way, I saw this somehow related article:
Empathy may not be uniquely human quality
http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994901
The ability to empathise is often considered uniquely human, the result of complex reasoning and abstract thought. But it might in fact be an incredibly simple brain process meaning that there is no reason why monkeys and other animals cannot empathise too.
That is the conclusion of Christian Keysers of the University of Groningen in the Netherlands and his colleagues. The team used a functional MRI scanner to monitor volunteers while their legs were touched and while they watched videos of other people being touched and of objects colliding.
To the team's surprise, a sensory area of the brain called the secondary somatosensory cortex, thought only to respond to physical touch, was strongly activated by the sight of others being touched.
<snip>
This means we can feel empathy without building up complex theories about what others feel, Keysers says. Instead, after we have learned what feeling goes with being touched ourselves, our brains become conditioned to trigger the same feeling when we see others being touched.
<snip>
[rhinoceros]
Well, I guess some people already knew that from pr0n. [Not that I would know *indecipherable grin*]. Anyway, if this is right, it means that at least some primitive elements of empathy are pre-conceptual.
---- This message was posted by rhinoceros to the Virus 2004 board on Church of Virus BBS. <http://virus.lucifer.com/bbs/index.php?board=61;action=display;threadid=30240> --- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon May 03 2004 - 09:46:19 MDT