Learning Morality from Monkeys

[happinesson]

this supports the theory of evolution!

[Heron001ful]

Humans could learn everything from animals ... if only they used there intelligence ... hum

[MacabreManifesto]

I am not an animal! I am a couch potato!

[vmorgun]

wow

[2nDoppelganger]

this ape likes what the ape in the video said

[dsmfishgal]

Frans de Waal's audiobook for "The Age of Empathy" absolutely rocks and would make a great gift this season! Wonderful food for thought. :)

[Neanderthalcouzin]

One (one) of my favorite Dutchman.

[keishafabio]

Amazing!

[openingman]

animals practice infanticide how moral

[roner61]

@openingman humans too.

[EoceneRoxton]

@openingman - humans practice infanticide, how divine!

[PeeGeeBeeDee]

I forgot what I was arguing here.

[YelloweOrc]

every thinking monkey should watch this! brillian man!

[KenMacMillan]

This is a perfect argument for libertarian atheism & free markets.

[AtheistCitizen]

... oh, this is the guy who wrote: Primates & Philosophers

[HBSchool]

I like the video but the example he gives for the altruism question isn't an act of altruism.

An act of Altruism requires a sacrifice (an arm, a leg) that is detrimental to you. What does the chimp sacrifice in consoling another?

Q. Would a primate knowingly sacrifice something of itself for any other purpose than propagating its genes? In such instances, how does this help either the primate or the species?

[PeeGeeBeeDee]

The Chimp is sacrificing time and emotions. And by sacrificing time and emotions he's maintaining his relationship with his fellow chimp and maintaining the social hierarchy and harmony within the troop. But, no, a Chimp doesn't consciously sacrifice something of itself (in this case, time and emotions) for a purpose other than propagating its genes because this altruism utimately effects the outcome of his/her reproductive success.

[PeeGeeBeeDee]

The Chimp is not conscious of his act. He doesn't know why he's doing it.

[HBSchool]

This could be said of humans as well.

[PeeGeeBeeDee]

You used the word "knowingly," though. And I don't know of any other primate that would "knowingly" commit such acts because no other primate has a conscience.

[shady4life1991]

@PeeGeeBeeDee

Oh really? There have been studies done with gorillas, which are less intelligent then chimpanzees, where humans were able to teach a gorilla human sign language, and the gorilla actually began forming sentences on it's on. I'd say that's pretty good evidence that animals of higher intelligence can be concious of how it thinks and why it thinks.

[shady4life1991]

own*

[TheWeeaboo]

@shady4life1991 woot? that must have been a pretty amazing study. But while im atheist i find it hard to believe this. ^^

[shady4life1991]

@TheWeeaboo Don't believe me ehh? Search koko the talking gorilla and watch it for your own eyes! :P

[HBSchool]

1. Altruism (pronounced: pronounced /ˈæltruːɪzəm/) is unselfish concern for the welfare of others.

2 : behavior by an animal that is not beneficial to or may be harmful to itself but that benefits others of its species.

Then, as I had stated before, this act cannot be considered altruistic. You're referring to the action as such doesn't make it so.

[PeeGeeBeeDee]

@HBSchool The only primate that would consciously, wittingly, intentionally sacrifice something of itself for any other purpose than propagating it's genes would be the human primate. This sacrifice may benefit him reproductively down the line, but more often than not it just benefits a fellow member of the human race or a fellow member of his/her race.

[HBSchool]

Perhaps, but I would argue altruistic actions actually hurt a species.

"Enablers" demonstrate this quite well, as do people who feed animals at a park.

[PeeGeeBeeDee]

OKAY, so people who enable my alcoholism are hurting the species? I don't know if that's true, because if I were to die because of my alcoholism prior to leaving behind any offspring the species would benefit because my genes for alcoholism would be removed (one less alcoholic in the species to pass on his genes and worry about).

[HBSchool]

Lol, you made my point.

[jockko09]

@PeeGeeBeeDee hahahahahhahaha, it's sad that i'm even responding to this because i've never felt the need to correct people through a comment on a youtube video, but you are sorely mistaken. And even more than that, it's the conviction with which you seem to state your response to HBSchool that's really sad. I'm sorry that you felt you were so founded in your answer that you needed to correct him/her.

[jockko09]

@PeeGeeBeeDee Rather than simply stating what would seem to be the correct answer since humans are "supreme beings" and all, try to back you ill-informed statement up with facts. Sorry to say it but you won't find any. On the contrary you will find many many instances in which you are incorrect. For a starter, look up elephants. I realize you will feel the need to lookup articles from the 1970's to refute what I'm saying, but spare both of us and don't reply to this.

[innovateur]

Frans de Waal is a genuis. His studies is reclaiming humans place within nature. The dichrotomy, nature vs nurture is an imaginiary one. They go hand and hand.

[PeeGeeBeeDee]

And they go hoard in the paint, hoard, hoard in the Paint.

[PeeGeeBeeDee]

Hoard in the paint, hoard, hoard in the Paint.

[PeeGeeBeeDee]

Little Cimps hangin' in the Hood.

[PeeGeeBeeDee]

LITERALLY