we aren't doing very well for our fellow neighbors, and we are behaving worse and more selfish all the time. it will take a lot to pull us together.....something far far worse than the twin towers......very sad., but lets be truthful and honest here. it looks grim, and i'm thinking positive. the negative i think of is far worse, so i won't go into detail.

Gandhi, "Be the change you wish to see in the world"

I say F^^k That, be the trouble you want too see!

Ok, I really didn't think that up on my own.

No, man is generally the same as always, he is as "good" as he can afford to be.

we aren't doing very well for our fellow neighbors, and we are behaving worse and more selfish all the time. it will take a lot to pull us together.....something far far worse than the twin towers......very sad., but lets be truthful and honest here. it looks grim, and i'm thinking positive. the negative i think of is far worse, so i won't go into detail.

I went to the gas station with my five year old son last night at about 11pm...

on a GOOD side of town...

the guy in front of me tried to sell me drugs..

durn we jsut came for a pack of smokes and somethin to drink..

i hate to see how the people in the world are evolving

your idea of 'thinking positive' is amusing

your idea of 'thinking positive' is amusing

i'm sorry to hear that but no shock. so are you saying also that mans moral behavior will not increase?? or are you saying it's decreasing?

Morallity and evolution have nothing to do with one another. Morallity is just a state of mind. what is moral to me might not be to you. It is a concept, not a definate thing. So if morallity is the basis of evolution, nothing will ever evolve.

We evolve every day though, we adapt to our environment, overcome challenges before thought undoable. Whether that is through physical exertion or mental process, evolution occurs all around. One just has to open his eyes a little wider to see it.

i dont believe morality is the "basis" for evolution or visa versa - what i said or was trying to say is - mans morality no matter what those moralities may be considered collectively or individuallly throughout the world seem to have not changed from the beginnig to any degree and seem to be worse than at other points - and was looking for resposes to that - i know form history that for instance the pygmies of borneo and other's felt it was fine to kill and boil and eat there enimies - so to them there was no moral issue til the jesuits came along and told them this was not right in gods eyes - im not talking of moral behavior based on dictated thinking but morals that are found throught out mankind and his history. be they accceptable to me or you as good. your response?

Well if you want to look at basic advancements, you have to compare what we are now from say prehistoric (or the so called uncivilized) man. In cave man times, the average man worked approximately 20 hours a week (sorry ladies you averaged 33 hours), spent appoximately 60 hours a week with his family. And look at us today, we've (men) definately found better ways of using our time (insert eye roll here).

But look how we mark our territory now, fences, mythical borders, that's a lot better than p**sing on a tree. We no longer drag women home by the hair, unless of course she's had way too much to drink. We got rid of the notion of every man for himself as far as reproduction occurs and have settled into a nice rythm of getting a woman pregnant, marrying her, divorcing her, and finding another woman to do the same. That's a lot better than just knocking some poor woman up and moving on to the next.

We've improved the way we eat, and the vitamin content in it, thus making us larger animals as a whole. While Napoleon might have been 5'2", he was actually an averaged sized person for his time. 6'1" George Washington was considered a extremely tall man for his time (kind of like Shaq).

It is considered immoral for a man in his forties to marry a woman in her teens (note I didn't say twenties, and I'm implying 13-15) such was the custom until the turn of the last century. It was considered better to marry your daughter to an older man, because he (odds are) would be in a better position to support such a spouse.

How about smashing the gender rolls? Women can do anything that men can do. Have any job, career, or still have the choice of being a "stay at home mom" in some cases. I think there is definate improvement over the "rule of thumb."

As far as the drug story, we've got better ones now, and we know when we take them. I remember reading a story about a society in England from around 1000 AD that historians found had substance traces of LSD in their system. Turns out they would make bread in the fall (Rye) and it would become moldy before spring. They'd eat it anyway, and as a consequence...

The problem that comes when people talk about evolution is that most expect grand sweeping changes occuring in a quick fashion. Doesn't happen that way, at least not without a catostrophic event. Evolution is slow, takes time, and is met with resistance. We'd even probably wipe out a small section of humans that were of the "next generation" before we realize the evolution is occuring, just because we would worry about the mutation. People resist change, even more as they get older. So, if you expect to see a civilized society in your lifetime, you'd better live a long time.
[/quot


im already 3 million yrs. old - and i aint seen mans morals improve yet - except for social reasons not because he would not still do what hes always done if he felt he could gat away with it -

Morality does have something to do with evolution because altruistic behavior is very important for studying humans and other species with complex social behavior.

How to make sense of altruism was one of the hardest things for Darwin to figure out how to explain (the other being sexual selection).

Altruism is just done for one to improve one's own self image. We like to feel good about ourselves.

As far as men go, sexual selection is just "who's willing"