Re: Evolutionary ethics (Re: What does an evolutionist actually believe?)


"Sylvia Knörr" <sylvia.knoerr_NoSpam_@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:dk8v87$389$05$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>

>
> I'm not sure whether xenophobia has outlasted it's usefulness. I'm not
> talking about that blunt kind of xenophobia which leads to violence and
> expulsion, but of an instinct which makes us more aware towards foreigners
> and strange behavior. While it is still useful to be somewhat suspicious
> towards foreigners, especially when they try to establish THEIR customs
> when
> they move to another place, we must be careful about what WE try to impose
> on others.
> I think a society should have the right to defend its laws and customs. A
> tangible example is the increasing number of Muslim immigrants (most of
> them
> Turkish) in Germany and other European nations. Since these immigrants
> demand the right to observe their own customs like ramadan or gender
> separation even for minors, there is a certain culture conflict. Is it
> wrong
> for Europeans to demand that the immigrants should adapt to their host
> nation?
> The conflict may root in xenophobia, but that doesn't mean we can't find
> peaceful agreements.

The root is in kin and mate selection and part of the pairing, bonding, and
banding that is part and parcel of the human condition. We are genetically
predisposed to be "favorable" to those who seem to be most like ourselves
while being predisposed to be "uncharitable" toward those who are less like
"I am." When the differences seem or appear to be extreme, the old,
paleolithic hackles rise. This becomes problematic when the "least like me"
is also threatening at some level. What is going on in Europe, as elsewhere,
is that the xenophobic tension has increased to lethality, because there is
or appears to be a threat associated with the dissimilarities. That is
aggravated, as mentioned earlier in this thread, by the tendency today to
look not on the similarities which bind us together as humans but the
dissimilarities which drive us apart as individuals and/or small groups.

It is useful only to the extent that it harbors us safely from the
dishonest, cheaters, blackguards, and evil-doers who hide in sheep's
clothing. It is no longer useful in that it prevents us from realizing the
larger neighborhoods we inhabit in a smaller world. We should be able to
find peaceful agreement, but one should never forget that there can be no
agreement with those who will not agree. And that, my friend, is the problem
with "global terrorism" (horrid phrase) today: there are those who simply
will not negotiate an amicable agreement. And we find such people on all
extremes. That is the sad part that you and I and others of good will must
deal with.


> For that reason I support the idea of student exchange programs for
> everyone. Although most nations lack the money to make it happen, my
> vision
> for a brighter future includes such a broad exchange program, so that
> every
> teenager has been exposed to a foreign surrounding at least once in his/
> her
> life until s/he reaches the age of voting. Everyone should have that
> experience you had - that everywhere else isn't like HERE. Everyone should
> be exposed to the experience to be a foreigner. This could help to
> understand others a lot better!

Sadly, though, because of the tendencies noted above, many of our fellow
citizens are most very suspicious of any foreign students.

> Very interesting observations! It immediately makes sense to me that those
> who feel
> themselves marginalized are more prone to grab every opportunity to regain
> some control over their lives and fates.
> On the other hand, this also might give us a clue how to handle the
> problem - just make every child part of the community, where everyone
> bears
> some responsibility for others. Of course, in a society which is based on
> competition this is hard to do.
> Then again, we should expect that in communist societies only few children
> suffer from marginalization the same way because they all experience equal
> treatment. Do you have any informations about them to compare it with
> capitalist systems?

That would be well outside my area of expertise, experience, or readings.
But it is an interesting question. One might find reasonable suggestions in
studies of the Kibbutzim.

> True, but I think a modern person should realize that no one can change
> his/
> her ancestry, so why not get over ancient blood feuds?

As mentioned previously, xenophobia runs deep.

> The idea of revenge and compensation leads nowhere. Just look at Middle
> East - a wicked circle of violence and revenge. No end of hostilities in
> sight, because there is always someone who still has to retaliate the life
> of a family member. With a little forgiveness they could move on.

You are correct, but there are some (admittedly the few on the extremes) who
will simply NOT move on.

>> You should meet some women soldiers, especially Israeli or Russian. You
>> are aware, aren't you, that some of Russia's most feared pilots and
>> sniper
>> during "The Great Patriotic War" were women?
>
> I don't doubt that they can be fierce fighters. It's just that I find the
> social job of killing and the biological job of bearing life somewhat
> contradictory.

Oh you sexist thing you!

> It started at a time when the lines of the other big apes and the hominids
> split. What is YOUR favourite theory about the crucial mechanism which
> lead
> us to being generalists?

I've not quite puzzled that out yet. It's a tough nut to crack, and I've not
found a good leverage point yet. That's part of the reason I hang out in
this (and related) newsgroup(s): every once in a while some knowledgeable
soul will post a link to some new discovery or theory that is interesting or
enlightening. It's very high mud content, but there's the occasional
truffle.


.