I have given an alternative explanation for the existence of morality which is in line with current science, such as our understanding of evolution. This, at the very least, disproves your notion that there is no other explanation for morality than religion and spirituality. It may not prove that religion and spirituality ISN’T the explanation, if that makes you happy. I refuse to go into broader topics such as the entirety of human behaviour.
Yes. I read the study. I have also read numerous studies demonstrating numerous situations where humans lack “inherent” empathy. The study you cited also says that this “inherent” drive isn’t seen for the first 6 months.
You can cite a single study all you want in an attempt to prove your point, but I won’t play your stupid fucking games.
I have given an alternative explanation for the existence of morality which is in line with current science, such as our understanding of evolution. This, at the very least, disproves your notion that there is no other explanation for morality than religion and spirituality. It may not prove that religion and spirituality ISN’T the explanation, if that makes you happy. I refuse to go into broader topics such as the entirety of human behaviour.
Empathy isn’t inherent, and that is not current science.
Take care.
Yes it is, on both accounts
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0163638311000506
Whatever you say bud.
Did you read the study? You said you’re here to learn.
Or was I right in my comment earlier?
https://lemmy.ca/post/47437481/17601176
Yes. I read the study. I have also read numerous studies demonstrating numerous situations where humans lack “inherent” empathy. The study you cited also says that this “inherent” drive isn’t seen for the first 6 months.
You can cite a single study all you want in an attempt to prove your point, but I won’t play your stupid fucking games.
Touch grass ignoramus.