From: "Phil Roberts, Jr."  
Date: Tue Feb 19, 2002 5:34am 
Subject: Re: [evol-psych] Re: Richard Dawkins: Our big brains can overcome our selfish genes  



Frans de Waal wrote:
> 
> Dawkins wrote:
> If any species in the history of life has the possibility of breaking
> away from short-term Darwinian selfishness and of planning for the
> distant future, it is our species. We are earth's last best hope ...
> 
> -------------------
> 
> The irony of it all is that Darwin himself was no proponent of
> "short-term Darwinian selfishness." It is Dawkins' (and T. H.
> Huxley's) cardboard version of Darwinism that is the problem.
> 
> Dawkins is going around saying that we can break with Darwin, that we
> should get rid of (some of) our biological heritage, whereas Darwin
> himself was adamant, in "The Descent of Man," that human kindness and
> morality belonged within an evolutionary framework. Instead of
> ascribing these and other enlightened capacities to exterior forces -
> an inherently dualistic, religious view - Darwin saw them as products
> of nature.
> 
> -- Frans de Waal
> 

But it is important to understand that something can be a product of 
natural selection without having ever been selected for (i.e., byproducts
of the process).  I believe this is more or less what Dawkins is 
maintaining, and I don't see it as the least bit incoherent with
the theory of natural selection.  

To illustrate:
Why couldn't our valuative profile (our moral nature) simply constitute
a maladaptive byproduct of the evolution of rationality itself.  For
example, in Chapter 8 of Arnhart's 'Darwinian Natural Right', 
he offers lots of data suggesting psychopaths generally tend to
show the same lack of regard for their own future interests that
they display toward the interests of others.  Couldn't our moral 
sentiments simply be the result of nature's inability to fine tune
our capacity to empathize to include concern for one's own future
self while at the same time excluding empathy for others?


Phil Roberts Jr.


P.S.  Comments similar to these were appended to one of my other 
posts, but I fear they may have gotten lost in the shuffle.