Thoughts on coming to school without a helmet (see future post),
and even without a bicycle (because my #$%$^%$# chain is
broken)...
Beth Benoit asked: "Is evil a survival mechanism"?"
Rick Adams got there first about evil being relative, but let me
put my own spin on this anyway.
"Evil" is an enormous abstraction. When I think of evil, I think
of things like people dying in earthquakes, from genetic or
infectious diseases, from purely random events such as car
accidents, etc. The dictionary supports me: evil is "harm"
(although it can also be a "sin").
But these events can't be a survival mechanism, although they may
provide the basis by which natural selection takes place. Is this
what is intended by the term? Probably not.
"Survival mechanism" implies that an act of evil must be
something that someone does which promotes the survival of
his/her genes. So we're talking about a particular form of evil,
that which one person perpetuates against another. But here's
where the relative comes in. What is evil to one person is
honourable to another; it's a moral or religious judgement, not
an absolute. Rick gave some good examples. Some others: to kill
or not to kill Salman Rushdie; to extract or refuse to extract
stem cells from aborted fetuses to help people with multiple
sclerosis and Parkinson's disease; to wear or not wear a condom
and prevent AIDS, to eat or refuse to eat pork.
In each case, what is evil to one group is a moral act to
another. Nevertheless, as most of us are not Moslem extremists we
would probably agree that it would be evil to kill Salman
Rushdie. So how would his murder promote the survival of the
killer's genes?
Perhaps, then, the Lucifer Principle applies only to universal
evils, those which everyone in all cultures agree are absolutely
abhorent. These are not easy to find. Is infanticide one? Does
killing babies promote your genes? Possibly, if you are male,
and the baby you kill is not your own. But without access to
modern technology, how can you be sure? Killing your own baby
is not a good idea, evolution-wise.
The point, I think, is that every case is different. Most cases
of evil are only evil to some; if truly universal evils exist,
each must be considered individually for the effect of the
practice on reproductive success. Down with abstractions! Evil
(and by extension, the Lucifer Principle) is not a scientifically
meaningful concept.
-Stephen
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Black, Ph.D. tel: (819) 822-9600 ext 2470
Department of Psychology fax: (819) 822-9661
Bishop's University e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Lennoxville, QC
J1M 1Z7
Canada Department web page at http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy
Check out TIPS listserv for teachers of psychology at:
http://www.frostburg.edu/dept/psyc/southerly/tips/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
