Originally posted by humy
No, judging from my introspection, that often isn't how the human mind works at all, even if it is how your warped mind works
Close examination reveals this.
Close examination of what? other people's minds? Do you now claim to be a mind reader of those that sacrificed their lives for other people? How does that work? In science, in general, ...[text shortened]... duck, unless you have very good reason to believe the contrary, you should assume it is a duck.
Close examination of what? other people's minds? Do you now claim to be a mind reader of those that sacrificed their lives for other people?
Let's test your charge of mind reading and see if it holds water.
Are you claiming to be able to read the mind of the person who sacrificed their life for another to live?
In science, in general, the simplest answers are assumed to be the most likely.
Not exactly.
Parsimony is a preferred statement, but truth itself is not contingent upon lack of complexity.
The "most likely" designation is more related to the hypotheses which requires the least amount of assumptions--- again, this doesn't make it irrefutably true, it simply leaves less to be wrong about as it relates to assumption.
The assumption of altruism is, in my mind, the equivalent of relying on a miracle: some unknown factor which cannot be examined or questioned, it just is what it is.
Part of that disconnect for me is the idea that humans are able to do what even their Creator is unable to do, and not only that, but seemingly at random and apparently (at least according to one self-reported hero herein) without thought.
But let's set the first of that disconnect aside and examine the second aspect, the random and without thought part.
For every example of altruism we have countless examples of selfishness without regard to long-term ramifications even for the actor, let alone the acted upon.
We also have countless examples of situations wherein the actor would have lost nothing for an altruistic act, but opted to purposely not help the other... which says nothing of the countless acts in which an actor has acted reprehensibly toward others.
So we're left with altruism as a random, unthinking, non-predictive act, as though even the actor himself is an unwilling participant in the event.
Can't buy that.
Can't buy the fact that in order for it to be a sacrifice, THOUGHT is
required, even if it is only at a subconscious level.
At that subconscious level, you're insisting the actor is inspired by nothing more than this nebulous ill-defined characteristic, over which he seemingly has not control: are manners altruistic? someone who doesn't steal? obeying rules of the road? tipping 20% at a restaurant?
We regularly observe and expect nothing less than to observe man in his continued quest for self-fulfillment, from birth to death, but in this one scenario, man dissolves his inherent bands of self-inspired betterment completely and paves the way for another to continue their own quest.
Sorry, ain't buying it.