Greed, jelousy, need for higher social status, etc. all these are natural human behaviors/emotions.
Is there any way to prove/disprove that greed is NOT natural to human psychology? (Remember, anthropology is an inexact science and we are always discovering more about our past - and there is much disagreement amongst anthropologists concerning evolutionary psychology and human behavior).
Some, myself included, would say that the fact that the human race has survived this long is proof.
To borrow from 'The Descent Of Woman' by Elaine Morgan, our pre - hominid ancestors - Australopithecus Afarensis - weren't armoured, did not have fangs and claws to fend off hungry predators and couldn't run fast enough to escape them. They survived by banding together and living and working co-operatively.
Given that we still have a vestigial tail and a vestigial appendix, it seems quite reasonable to surmise we have retained characteristics of far more value.
Keep in mind too,that a lack of evidence is not proof of the negative. Can you prove there's not a teapot in orbit around the Earth?
Meanwhile, most science is inexact. Anybody seen Schrodingers' Cat?
Exactly (in reference to the teapot and Schrodingers' Cat). Multiple theories. No concrete proof. No hypothesis to be nullified (scientifically speaking).
There are theories that greed is innate. There are other theories that greed is not innate. Does anyone know for sure? Why are we arguing about something that we cannot be sure about?
Greed, jelousy, need for higher social status, etc. all these are natural human behaviors/emotions.
Is there any way to prove/disprove that greed is NOT natural to human psychology? (Remember, anthropology is an inexact science and we are always discovering more about our past - and there is much disagreement amongst anthropologists concerning evolutionary psychology and human behavior).
Some, myself included, would say that the fact that the human race has survived this long is proof.
To borrow from 'The Descent Of Woman' by Elaine Morgan, our pre - hominid ancestors - Australopithecus Afarensis - weren't armoured, did not have fangs and claws to fend off hungry predators and couldn't run fast enough to escape them. They survived by banding together and living and working co-operatively.
Given that we still have a vestigial tail and a vestigial appendix, it seems quite reasonable to surmise we have retained characteristics of far more value.
Keep in mind too,that a lack of evidence is not proof of the negative. Can you prove there's not a teapot in orbit around the Earth?
Meanwhile, most science is inexact. Anybody seen Schrodingers' Cat?
Exactly (in reference to the teapot and Schrodingers' Cat). Multiple theories. No concrete proof. No hypothesis to be nullified (scientifically speaking).
There are theories that greed is innate. There are other theories that greed is not innate. Does anyone know for sure? Why are we arguing about something that we cannot be sure about?
This isn't an argument: )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohDB5gbtaEQ
Love the clip!