Essay on importance of moral values in human life

British Dictionary definitions for nature nature noun the fundamental qualities of a person or thing; identity or essential character often capital, esp when personified the whole system of the existence, arrangement, forces, and events of all physical life that are not controlled by man all natural phenomena and plant and animal life, as distinct from man and his creations a wild primitive state untouched by man or civilization natural unspoilt scenery or countryside disposition or temperament tendencies, desires, or instincts governing behaviour the normal biological needs or urges of the body sort; kind; character the real appearance of a person or thinga painting very true to nature accepted standards of basic morality or behaviour biology the complement of genetic material that partly determines the structure of an organism; genotypeCompare nurture def.

Essay on importance of moral values in human life

Max Gerber] I am often asked whether I agree with the new group selectionists, and the questioners are always surprised when I say I do not. After all, group selection sounds like a reasonable extension of evolutionary theory and a plausible explanation of the social nature of humans.

Also, the group selectionists tend to declare victory, and write as if their theory has already superseded a narrow, reductionist dogma that selection acts only at the level of genes.

In this essay, I'll explain why I think that this reasonableness is an illusion. The more carefully you think about group selection, the Essay on importance of moral values in human life sense it makes, and the more poorly it fits the facts of human psychology and history.

The problem is that it also obfuscates evolutionary theory by blurring genes, individuals, and groups as equivalent levels in a hierarchy of selectional units; Most importantly, it has placed blinkers on psychological understanding by seducing many people into simply equating morality and culture with group selection, oblivious to alternatives that are theoretically deeper and empirically more realistic.

Does this mean that the human brain has been shaped by natural selection to promote the welfare of the group in competition with other groups, even when it damages the welfare of the person and his or her kin?

An encyclopedia of philosophy articles written by professional philosophers.

If so, does the theory of natural selection have to be revamped to designate "groups" as units of selection, analogous to the role played in the theory by genes?

Several scientists whom I greatly respect have said so in prominent places. And they have gone on to use the theory of group selection to make eye-opening claims about the human condition. Wilson explains, "In a group, selfish individuals beat altruistic individuals.

But, groups of altruistic individuals beat groups of selfish individuals. They suggest that evolution has equipped humans to solve tragedies of the commons also known as collective action dilemmas and public goods gamesin which actions that benefit the individual may harm the community; familiar examples include overfishing, highway congestion, tax evasion, and carbon emissions.

And they have drawn normative moral and political conclusions from these scientific beliefs, such as that we should recognize the wisdom behind conservative values, like religiosity, patriotism, and puritanism, and that we should valorize a communitarian loyalty and sacrifice for the good of the group over an every-man-for-himself individualism.

I am often asked whether I agree with the new group selectionists, and the questioners are always surprised when I say I do not. Why does this matter? I'll try to show that it has everything to do with our best scientific understanding of the evolution of life and the evolution of human nature.

And though I won't take up the various moral and political colorings of the debate here I have discussed them elsewhereit ultimately matters for understanding how best to deal with the collective action problems facing our species.

The first big problem with group selection is that the term itself sows so much confusion. People invoke it to refer to many distinct phenomena, so casual users may literally not know what they are talking about.

I have seen "group selection" used as a loose synonym for the evolution of organisms that live in groups, and for any competition among groups, such as human warfare. Sometimes the term is needlessly used to refer to an individual trait that happens to be shared by the members of a group; as the evolutionary biologist George Williams noted,"a fleet herd of deer" is really just a herd of fleet deer.

Meditations On Moloch | Slate Star Codex

And sometimes the term is used as a way of redescribing the conventional gene-level theory of natural selection in different words: In this essay I'll concentrate on the sense of "group selection" as a version of natural selection which acts on groups in the same way that it acts on individual organisms, namely, to maximize their inclusive fitness alternatively, which acts on groups in the same way it acts on genes, namely to increase the number of copies that appear in the next generation; I will treat these formulations as equivalent.

Modern advocates of group selection don't deny that selection acts on individual organisms; they only wish to add that it acts on higher-level aggregates, particularly groups of organisms, as well.

For this reason, the theory is often called "multilevel selection" rather than "group selection. I don't think it makes sense to conceive of groups of organisms in particular, human societies as sitting at the top of a fractal hierarchy with genes at the bottom, with natural selection applying to each level in parallel ways.

First I'll examine the idea that group selection is a viable explanation of the traits of human groups such as tribes, religions, cultures, and nations. Then I'll turn to group selection as an explanation of the traits of individual humans, that is, the intuitions and emotions that make it possible for people to learn their culture and coexist in societies.

No one denies that such faculties exist. Finally I'll examine the empirical phenomena that have been claimed to show that group selection is necessary to explain human altruism.From: Philosophy and Human Values () Lecture 6: Nietzsche – Knowledge and Belief Transcript: First, what’s supposed to be so scandalous about Nietzsche.

Nietzsche is supposed to hold the scandalous view that knowledge is a form of power. The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values is a book by Sam Harris published in In it, he promotes a science of morality and argues that many thinkers have long confused the relationship between morality, facts, and science.

He aims to carve a third path between secularists who say morality is subjective (e.g. moral relativists), and religionists who say that morality is. Moral Values: Importance of Moral Values in Student Life Category: Essays, Paragraphs and Articles On October 18, By Sanjoy Roy Moral Values are the worthy ideals or principles that one follows to distinguish the right from the wrong.

The Moral Accounting Schemes. The general metaphor of Moral Accounting is realized in a small number of basic moral schemes: Reciprocation, Retribution, Restitution, Revenge, Altruism, etc. Each of these moral schemes is defined using the metaphor of Moral Accounting, but the schemes differ as how they use this metaphor, that is, they differ as to their inherent logics.

College Essay Three. The winter of my seventh grade year, my alcoholic mother entered a psychiatric unit for an attempted suicide.

Essay on importance of moral values in human life

Mom survived, but I would never forget visiting her at the ward or the complete confusion I felt about her attempt to end her life. 7 God, Naturalism, and the Foundations of Morality Paul Copan French Catholic philosopher Jacques Maritain helped draft the United Nations Declaration of Human .