I think that all people have equal value in terms of their intrinsic worth, which also implies that all should have the same rights under the law and in society. On the other hand, different people have different skill sets, different approaches to life, different cultural backgrounds, etc. There are some people who have the skills and character to be leaders, and others who would prefer to follow, and not have to worry about "the big picture". There are some who love to use there minds and consider abstract concepts, while others consider such activities a waste of time and prefer to "get things done." In short, each person has strengths and weaknesses, in their potential and in there actual condition.
One of the goals of an improved society should be to provide support and stimulus for each individual to develop his or her capacities, and to find a way to use those capacities to earn a living. I do not see how this could be done without some sort of educational system that teaches people how to develop character, resolve conflict, and collaborate, along with arts, sciences, literature, history, crafts, and so on. One model that is already being tried with notable success is based on incorporating character-education/self-mastery, peacemaking skills, as well as local and global service into the curriculum. (http://fullcirclelearning.org/default.aspx) On Feb 10, 8:12 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > On 10 Feb, 04:50, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > This is an extract from a recent article. > > The details surrounding the emergence and evolution of religion have > > not been clearly established and remain a source of much debate among > > scholars. Now, an article published by Cell Press in the journal > > Trends in Cognitive Sciences on February 8 brings a new understanding > > to this long-standing discussion by exploring the fascinating link > > between morality and religion. > > > There is no doubt that spiritual experiences and religion, which are > > ubiquitous across cultures and time and associated exclusively with > > humans, [actually something similar seems to have been observed in > > chimps] are ultimately based in the brain. However, there are many > > unanswered questions about how and why these behaviors originated and > > how they may have been shaped during evolution. > > > "Some scholars claim that religion evolved as an adaptation to solve > > the problem of cooperation among genetically unrelated individuals, > > while others propose that religion emerged as a by-product of pre- > > existing cognitive capacities," explains study co-author Dr. Ilkka > > Pyysiainen from the Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies. Although > > there is some support for both, these alternative proposals have been > > difficult to investigate. > > > Dr. Pyysiainen and co-author Dr. Marc Hauser, from the Departments of > > Psychology and Human Evolutionary Biology at Harvard University, used > > a fresh perspective based in experimental moral psychology to review > > these two competing theories. "We were interested in making use of > > this perspective because religion is linked to morality in different > > ways," says Dr. Hauser. "For some, there is no morality without > > religion, while others see religion as merely one way of expressing > > one's moral intuitions." > > > Citing several studies in moral psychology, the authors highlight the > > finding that despite differences in, or even an absence of, religious > > backgrounds, individuals show no difference in moral judgments for > > unfamiliar moral dilemmas. The research suggests that intuitive > > judgments of right and wrong seem to operate independently of explicit > > religious commitments. > > > "This supports the theory that religion did not originally emerge as a > > biological adaptation for cooperation, but evolved as a separate by- > > product of pre-existing cognitive functions that evolved from non- > > religious functions," says Dr. Pyysiainen. "However, although it > > appears as if cooperation is made possible by mental mechanisms that > > are not specific to religion, religion can play a role in facilitating > > and stabilizing cooperation between groups." > > > Perhaps this may help to explain the complex association between > > morality and religion. "It seems that in many cultures religious > > concepts and beliefs have become the standard way of conceptualizing > > moral intuitions. Although, as we discuss in our paper, this link is > > not a necessary one, many people have become so accustomed to using > > it, that criticism targeted at religion is experienced as a > > fundamental threat to our moral existence," concludes Dr. Hauser. > > > I tend to see religion much as I would view political correctness - > > that is, peevish, hostile, posturing pretense to be on the moral high > > ground. Even Orn, who is a splendid example of the opposite most of > > the time, lapses to this and so do I. I'm sure he won't take offence > > and think I'm merely pointing to difficulties, not accusing him. Any > > quest for origin is fraught with self-deception and the struggle to > > sort wheat from chaff. > > > I'm not looking for religion, but radical, practical changes in > > society, the way we live and could live - this, of course, sounds > > rather religious! > > Yup, it sure does. But only if people live like that religiously, > i.e., devoutly. The problem, of course, is what are the tenets OF > your 'practical changes to society' and 'the way we...could live'? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
