Replies

That is the origin of empathy. Not protecting the brood or nuzzling with a mate. An animal, insect, etc., cannot apprehend the emotion or condition of another as its own.

Insects can be dismissed immediately - their thought processes consist of some basic neurological functions and a few survival and reproduction instincts. But we certainly can see examples of empathy in the case of animals which possess a certain minimum level of intelligence. When we see a chimp in a lab attempting to help a strange human reaching for an object, we're seeing an animal comprehending the need of the human and responding to it. When we see elephants standing guard for days over an unrelated fallen comrade against people attempting to sedate and collar it, we see animals comprehending and responding to the plight of their fellow. These are the beginnings of the thought processes which humans, with our greater levels of intelligence, eventually developed into the concepts of compassion and morality.

Such concepts always boil down, in the end, to treating our fellows as we would wish to be treated. And these concepts are not always fostered by religions, which may decree death for non-believers, subjugation of non-believers, promote unfair hierarchies among the believers, etc.

Who said they're the same? Acting under fear of punishment is anxiety.

Acting under fear of punishment is at the heart of the argument of those who claim religion is the source of human morality and ethics. Such claims always boil down to the belief that without the fear of God's punishment (corporal or spiritual) to keep them in line, people would abandon all morality and run amok. This is simply not true and ignores the reality of human nature and human societies.

But we certainly can see examples of empathy in the case of animals which possess a certain minimum level of intelligence. When we see a chimp in a lab attempting to help a strange human reaching for an object, we're seeing an animal comprehending the need of the human and responding to it.

Empathy involves emotion. What emotion is the chimp displaying? Pity? How do you know the chimp isn't reaching for it in competition? Did the chimp think, "oh, that poor, strange human. Let me give him a hand"?

When we see elephants standing guard for days over an unrelated fallen comrade against people attempting to sedate and collar it, we see animals comprehending and responding to the plight of their fellow.

No they're not. They're instinctively protecting the species. I don't see elephants banding together to protect the antelope population from cheetahs, do you? If they comprehend that, why aren't they banding together to hunt and kill poachers?

These are the beginnings of the thought processes which humans, with our greater levels of intelligence, eventually developed into the concepts of compassion and morality.

How do these thoughts make the leap from instinct to "compassion and morality". If it's possible, why are there no species "in transit", so to speak, from mere brutes to Hallmark Greeting Card designers? If you're postulating that this takes place, you must have an opinion of what agent affects the change, don't you? Since the earth is alive, does it have instinct? Can it develop instinct? Why or why not?

Such concepts always boil down, in the end, to treating our fellows as we would wish to be treated.

Terrifyingly simple, isn't it? Unfortunately, the tack of human history has been to treat others in ways we would never want to be treated, which makes the concept of a God who preaches something different an idea worthy of crucifying to a cross.

And these concepts are not always fostered by religions, which may decree death for non-believers, subjugation of non-believers, promote unfair hierarchies among the believers, etc.

Depends on the religion. That's why moral relativism is a sham. There can only be One Truth.

Acting under fear of punishment is at the heart of the argument of those who claim religion is the source of human morality and ethics.

They argue wrongly. The source of human morality and ethics is nature's desire to mimic what created it. Thus, the child yearns on one level to mimic his/her parent. At a deeper level, the soul yearns to mimic God, in Whose image - perfect goodness - it was created. When teenagers decide to stop mimicking their parents, it's called rebellion, and often leads to imprudent decisions and dangerous outcomes. The same happens when the soul decides to stop mimicking God by rejecting morality, and always leads to sin. The Prodigal Sin returned to the Father out of anxiety, but it didn't make the Father less worthy of his love. It wasn't until he had something to fear that he recognized the error of his ways. The element of fear in Religion is simply the acknowledgment (to whatever degree) that we are all Prodigal children who need the Father that created us.

without the fear of God's punishment (corporal or spiritual) to keep them in line, people would abandon all morality and run amok.

The reason people fear God's punishment is because they do abandon all morality and run amok. The saints had great peace of heart. Why's that I wonder?

Such claims always boil down to the belief that without the fear of God’s punishment (corporal or spiritual) to keep them in line, people would abandon all morality and run amok. This is simply not true and ignores the reality of human nature and human societies.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Without the fear of god’s punishment or repercussions of some kind in an afterlife, very clever individuals will endeavor to secretly commit heinous acts for selfish gain if they believe they can do so with a reasonable certainty of not being found out. No evidence/witnesses=no crime/sin. But at the same time, these individuals will all along take great pains to make sure all their acts of good will are readily noticed by their neighbors. A person that believes in god or an afterlife has less incentive to make his/her acts of good will readily noticeable to neighbors and will take some pains to resist secret selfish acts that cause harm to others...or at least suffer emotional pain from giving in to such selfishness.

Put simply, a god fearing individual has a greater sense of right and wrong and a minimized self centered view of the world. The picture gets seriously muddied, however, when one considers the possibility that a very clever individual could possibly falsify his/her own piety in order to deceive neighbors and disguise acts of selfishness.

Oh what a tangled web we weave...