At 12/27/06 08:41 AM, Earfetish wrote:
Every culture has similar morals but it moulds itself to the surroundings. Like we didn't think slavery was bad. Not harming your own tribe seems to be the basic moral code, but that'd be shit in modern day society so our morals have adapted to function better. Like monkey morals compared to captive monkey morals.
An anthropologist or history would tell you many cultures are not the same. Let's look at many ancient cultures. The egpytians had no qualms with men killing eachother in order to take something they covetted from the deceased or the assyrians who not only idolized the act of genocide, but loved torture so much they included scenes of them torturing a prisoner in their artwork. Or we could look at the chinese, who had a similar outlook as the egyptians.
Now, compare our modern civilization to theirs. The only reason we have alot of the morals we do today is due to the diffusion of Judeo-Christian principles into the Middle Ages,
Awakening and Reformation period. In turn the europeans traders spread these same morals as they traded with foreigners who adopted them into their own cultures.
The tribesmen comparison is also inconsistant. A bushman of an African tribe might not kill a fellow members, but has no problem pillaging, marauding and raping women of another tribe as well as sell them into slavery. Certainly something someone of modern times would do commit.
But anyone who says that morality only exists because of religion can turn their attention to bees, protecting the mother bee for clearer reasons in regards to DNA protection, or monkeys, or any other animal that behaves with altruism when the cards are down.
Protecting a mother bee is not an issue of good an evil. It is only natural-selection and only that. What Mr. Dawkins fails to realize is his morality is subjective.