Follow the link below and read the article called "Dogs Understand Fairnes......" This news report seems to assert that our sense of fairness is an evolutionary byproduct. However, when we did our unit on faith, many of our questionaires dealt with the idea of equality as a spiritual concept.
Are you more inclined to think your sense of fairness comes from evolution or from something beyond evolutionary development?
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=97944783
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
40 comments:
I think our sense of fairness is mostly evolutionary. They did the research on monkeys (which are our closest ancestors according to science), and they stated that the monkey that wasn't treated fair would throw the food and give a fit. The same is true with us as human beings. When one sibling is given better material goods than the other, the one treated unfair will most likely grow to resent their parents, just like the monkey.
The dog, on the other hand, felt the same way the monkey did when he wasn't given a fair reward (which was nothing at all). The difference though between the dog and the monkey was that the dog's were given different foods and didn't care. The monkey, though, was pissed off when he got a lower quality food than the other monkey, which is what differs the monkey from the dog. With an average human, as mentioned above, the one given lower quality clothes wouldn't be satisfied (like the dog), but would be mad, like the monkey.
I can't say this is only from evolution, but I believe it is mostly evolution with a mix of past experiences.
I believe our sense of fairness does come from evolution. We, as humans, do not run solely on animal instincts, therefore we won't go apeshit when treated unfairly and start throwing everything everywhere, but the majority of us would feel anger and generally express this emotion in some fashion.
Cooper and Pfeif,
I understand what both of you are saying that fairness is an aspect of evolution, but neither of you seem to address why we think things should be fair, so I'll ask.
Why do human beings and animals apparently believe that things should be fair? If fairness implies that all creatures should be treated equally then why do we believe that we are fundamentally equal? It can be argued that evolution is an inherently unequal process; therefor, can fairness and equality, by extension, be a product of evolution?
I think human beings and animals think things should be fair for themselves, not necessarily to all species, because every creature is looking out for themselves foremost. Some point in history, human beings started believing that they were above equal to other species, so our definition of fairness is humanistic, not universal to all creatures, so I believe fairness is an aspect of evolution still.
I think that our sense of fairness is evolutionary. But, this is mostly based on the fact that I have never been a very religious or spiritually inclined person. I tend to believe that everything has a scientific explaination behind it.
I agreed with Cooper's comparison of humans to the dogs and monkeys. All 3 have their sense of fairness, but I think ours as humans are more developed. Like if someone's mom made a three course meal for one kid and then frozen food for the other, the one stuck with the Digiorno is going to be pretty pissed. Where as, if the same thing happened to dogs, they'd probably both be content because they both got food.
I'm not really sure whether or not equality would be an extension of evolution. It may be, but I would just think it was human nature to want to be treated equally.
I believe that our sense of fairness does come from evolution. An animal with a more complex mind will think more about equality than another that does not see much difference in things or pays as much attention to any details. So if they lack the capability of seeing the difference in their rewards such as the dogs did for the most part then they do not pay as much attention or they cannot comprehend the difference. While the monkeys can, and it has been proven that monkeys have a more complex thought process and are more closely related to humans which is what we view as the most complex mind set. Humans beings able to make great distinction in difference of items and quality of items develop a much stronger sense of actually knowing the difference, and thus want to be treated equally because they can distinguish the small details that make those differences. Reasons for humans wanting to be treated equal is the mind set that if you this amount of work then you deserve this amount of pay. If one person notices that they are all doing the same amount of work and have the same quality because humans can tell these small differences then they believe the reward should be equal as well. If quality were different then they would understand why someone would get more than the other, but if it was not then something that humans developed and many more animals have which is equality will kick in. Why does he get more when we did the exact same amount of work and delivered the same amount of quality? It is all based on rules or ideas that people have set down. Such as seniority in a job, you will get payed more. Things will not be equal because of certain aspects at time, but what said that we were equal from the very beginning? Nothing did it was just driven into our thought process that if this amount of work and quality is done, then this amount of reward or pay must be received. But otherwise there is nothing that says we are equal, for the exception of rules that are put into place.
I am religious and though the sense of equality is apart of faith it is not something instilled in us. In my religion we are to come to an understanding and acceptance that all are equal. No one is obviously expected to naturally have the sense that all are equal. Practicing and understanding the action of treating others as our equal is something we must work towards. I agree with Cooper when he says that every creature is looking out for themselves. If we are the ones who are receiving the lesser of the treatments in a situation then we consciously feel that we should be treated equal. If we are those being treated better than others then we do not become angry or even take notice unless we have some sense of compassion towards those being treated unfair based off of religion or any natural feelings. The question of whether the sense of fairness is evolutionary based completely depends on your belief in evolution. The only reason the monkey acts differently than the dog and the human even more different than the monkey has to do with the different species intelligence and understanding of the situation. All are following basic instincts to obtain food just the species who are more advanced realize that they can obtain more and that it is not right that the others are receiving better. If you believe in evolution then this difference in reactions might fit the idea that this sense is evolutionary based.
The dogs reacting the way they did might also simply have to do with their obedience to a far more dominant species (humans) than them, therefore they are just grateful for what they receive.
Hmm. I may get lost in what I am saying, because I have seen such long replies, but I will try to stay on topic.
I agree with what Megan said about our sense of fairness coming from evolution and something beyond. Our sense of fairness is something that is evolutionary because of the monkeys that exhibited their sense of fairness, I wouldn't call that proof, but it pins the nail on the donkey. I believe it comes from something beyond because our mind is so developed, it can put things in places by itself, such as a memory combined with a dream or another memory to create deja vu. Yeah that sounds so weird, but that is the kind of weird stuff the human mind does. I think the human mind is capable of altering our beliefs and improving on a situation where I could do the same amount of chores and work as my sister, but she gets paid more. You would think that I should just be happy that I got money and not care about what she gets. But you don't think about what she gets because there is no other way to think. Does that make sense?
Mr.Land to answer your question, humans and animals believe that things should be equal because of our jelous nature. You feel jelous when someone has something you really want and you arent able to get it. It's the same with the monkeys and dogs, one of the monkeys recieved a better reward fot the same task so they feel jelous towards the other monkey for getting the better reward.
Uh....I really am tired. I agree with cooper's second statement. Our view of fairness is humanistic because we are at the top of the food chain. Their fore as a species, we should have nothing to complain about.
I think our sense of fairness is obviously a result of evolution. Right when you are born-what do you do? You cry, mainly for attention, because attention offers a sense of security for an individual, thus putting them at ease. So once the basic necessity of security is accomplished, you need food. What do babies do in order to get food? They cry. They realize that they can cry in order to get what they want, because jealousy is a human trait. Babies are angered by not having things they want, therefore they cry. The biggest rule of life is to reproduce, and animals are more likely to reproduce if they can acquire basic necessities easier. Food is one these necessities, and if Monkey-A gets a greater reward for doing the same trait as Monkey-B, that would cause Monkey-B to be angered and thus jealous towards monkey-A because it is not an equal reward. That, right there, is how one can determine the sense of fairness.
I believe our sense of fairness doesn't neccesarily come from any outside source or genetic evolution, but moreso constantly changes based on the culture around us. In some countries such as India, people find it fair to burn unfaithful wives, while Americans see that as unfair, unjust, and morally corrupt all together. So, I think fairness is a byproduct of morals, which is not at all a genetic development.
I disagree with Wasi. I don't believe that fairness is something that comes out of jealousy; that's more punishment and prosecution. Fairness is what you believe is right versus what is wrong, and how to make all things on the same level, no matter the external circumstances. That, in my opinion, has nothing to do with jealousy.
Theres no way to respond in a manner that 1 of 10+ other students hasn't already but, I question as to whether or not fairness is evolutionary. Some people are naturally smarter than me, some are naturally stronger than me, some naturally recieve better treatment than me, but I feel no ill will towards any of these people. For who is to say what's fair? Fairness is a concept within each of our minds and unless I know how every single other person in the world percieves fairness I don't think I can call anything unfair. That is my choice, I don't think it has anything to do with evolution.
I disagree with Jessica's assertion that all Indian's find the act of "burning wives" fair, while all American's consider this unfair. I doubt all Indian's find this "fair", but instead were raised to not think this such a harsh punishment, the wife did something unnaceptable in their society and in their mind deserves to be punished, fair or not. And I myself don't consider this fair or unfair, that is not to say I don't find it morally wrong because I do, but if I was allowed to, without punishment, more "harshly" punish people who have wronged me I most certainly would.
I feel that our sense of fairness is defined through evolution because when a baby or puppy is born, they do not know much at all of the way to act or anything of world they are coming into. So they have to evolve into the type of person or dog that can understand how to react to things that are fair or unfair. So a dog that realizes that another dog is getting more food for doing the same trick, he will know to stop doing the trick or stop performing well because he evolved to know how to react to that type of situation.
i disagree with Winter's post. I dont neccesarily feel that our sense of fairness is more devloped, I think it seems more developed only because we do not really know alot about how a dog thinks or feels. The only way we could know this is if one of us was a dog for a day. So i would not say that our sense of fairness ir more developed because we do not really know everything about dogs in order to state that ours is more developed.
I disagree with Patrick Lawrence, not because he says that fairness stems from evolution but because he fails to support his assumption with a valid example. In order to feel a sense of fairness, their must be something else for the baby to compare itself to, such as baby A recieving a toy causing baby B to throw a tantrum. In your example, the baby cries as a way of survival, not out of a sense of what is fair.
As Megan said I cannot agree or disagree with any of your ideas. Why? Because we don't know what the true answer is. While I disagree with her that religion and science can coexist I do agree that I can't say my answer is more right than any of yours.
Our unterstanding of fairness has evolved as our brains have. It came from being able to thrive instead of merely surviving, and the dissatisfaction that came from observing others receiving better things from exerting the same amount of effort as yourself. It might actually have evolved from a baser concept: jealousy. Jealousy towards others who have found better things might have been refined into what humans began to consider a sense of just and unjust.
I believe that responses to fairness is a trait that results from evolutionary progression. For example, it was explained that the monkeys, who are more human-like in their genetic makeup, were more aware of the differences in the rewards as compared to the dogs' responses to the rewards of differentiating tastes.
Also, even if someone wanted to argue that the responses to fairness were those based on faith, I would have to counter-argue that the ability to believe in spiritual concepts, i.e. types of faith, would have to be a result in evolutionary progression. This can be seen in how, say hamsters, do not have a concept of a life after death (at least to my knowledge) versus humans that can comprehend such a thing.
I agree with Cooper's second comment as a response to Mr. Land's question. That is, that that our idea of fairness is different from those that an animal might have. Even if they are similar in some cases, e.g. not responding to a stimuli when we feel that we are not receiving an equal amount of reward as someone else, our concept of fairness tends to be more complicated, showing a greater comprehension of the matter. And even though evolution is an unequal process, I still believe that our thoughts of fairness are a result of that, as it is shown of varying scales in correspondence to varying levels of evolution.
I disagree with Jessica's first statement. Even though her example of cultural differences is true, in that we may not view those actions taken against the Indians wives morally or ethically acceptable, they are, like us, ultimately human. So even though we may not agree with how to handle the situation, both the differing cultures are able to comprehend the situation in an equal matter. Since the matter is debatable from both of the cultural sides, it is because we as beings on a higher evolutionary scale have the ability to choose different behaviors and cultural interactions.
Animals on a lower evolutionary scales, e.g. rodents do not hold the same capabilities to do such within their own environments.
So either way, it still proves to be a result of differing level of evolution.
i believe that this theory of fairness being inatlly instilled in us through evolution may in fact be some what true. we humans as being the pinacle of evolution thus far should look back on other animal species, and apreciate the traits that we share with them and recognize that along the way we develpod from them. the idea of evolution being concerned with this fairness idea doesn't seem suprising to me, in fact it just seems to make sense.
i happen to agree with Monicas first comment about our ability to asses fairness being more complicated than any other animal makes sense, because we are more complicated than any other animal. it has only been recentlly that any animal posseses the ability to look back on thier predecessors and scoff and thier ignorence. of course one day we will be viewed in this way and we may even be currentlly viewed this way by others. so yes i think we have a more developed sense of fairness and yet it has not finished developing and will be even more complicated one day so this seems like a fair essesment to me.
I believe that the ability to judge what is/isn't fair is evolutionary, because that more evolved you are the better you understand not only yourself and your environment but others and theirs so you are able to realize the treatment they are receiving and compare it to the treatment you are receiving so you can then judge whether you think its fair, i also agree with the whole dog thing because i know that when i feed my dogs they don;t care what/how much they are getting as long as they are getting something.
After reading Jessica's comment on cultural differences affecting fairness, it made me reassess me first statement that fairness is evolutionary. I think it might be a combination of the two- culture and evolution. I thought her burning Indian wives example was really good in showing that fairness differs from culture to culture, which made me agree with her. But I still stand by theory that dogs and other animals that are less evolved have a more primitive sense of fairness.
I agree with megan, i think this argument isn't completely one sided, it really is up to personal beliefs and i think trying to scientifically prove that an animal has a certain emotion(in the monkeys case jealousy) is practically impossible, thus it is impossible to prove whether something can judge whether something is/isn't fair.
I think that our understanding of fairness comes mainly from past experiences and personal beliefs. Although, I can understand how evolution can affect our understanding of fairness. Because my grandparents' and my parents' understanding of fairness affects my understanding of fairness. So maybe it's a bit of both.
I agreed with Megan's comment. I have always thought their was an explanation beyond science, religion, etc... I always believed they both coexisted to create something spiritual. But the way Megan worded it was to deep for me to completely comprehend.
I disagree with Ethan's post. I am not religious whatsoever- I don't really follow any faith, yet I have a sense of fairness. So obviously, at least for me, my sense of fairness did not come from a religion. Do dogs and monkeys have religion that they could base their sense of fairness off of?
I disagree with ethan, i don't think all animals are equal. that doesn't necessarily mean that i think humans are better then every species, because i don't, but i think that when it comes to intelligence and the ability to judge what is fair humans are superior. I'm not religious so i don't believe that each animal was created the way it is with its intelligence, i think that certain animals evolved more then others and in different ways, such as the monkey who is more evolved then the dog, and is thus able to judge and compare his treatment to the other monkeys unlike that dog.
I agree with Cooper. All animals have a sense of what they deserve in proportion to other organisms, and humans, after becoming sapient and self-aware, began to think that fairness is that they should naturally receive more because they are more developed and evolved than other organisms.
I disagree with ethan in that equality is based in faith. Fairness comes, at base, from a primal jealousy towards others who have been given or have received more and the desire to have these things ourselves. There are many different religion and their senses of fairness according to their various dogmas and ideals differ in one or more ways. However, the sense of fair and unfair, just and unjust, is rather universal and came before faith and religion in it's primitive form.
I disagree with Winter, Reiley, and Vince's disagreements with my statements.
Winter and Vince- I do not state anywhere that fairness is religious based or that those whom are not of faith do not have an understanding of faith. I simply stated my experiences and understanding of fairness through religion as a man of faith. I say that fairness is apart of religion not religion based.
Reiley- Once again, I did not state anything about all animals being equal.
Please read and come to an understanding of what others are saying before making comments.
I agree with Jessica when she says that the idea of fairness is not evolutionary; it based upon a culture's morals. Different societies have different expectations and norms. To say that fairness is evolutionary is to imply that there is only one accepted definition of fairness across the globe.
I think our sense of fairness is mostly evolutionary. Well when someone has something that i would want and that someone was somewhat related to me I would feel very mistreated but when that certain someone is just a random person i really wouldn't care because of the relation and because of common courtesy. For exanple two Christmases ago my baby cousin that is 5 years old got a PS3 from my parents when I've been wanting one and then my parents go off and buy a cousin of mine one. Whth that happening I was very angry and this proves that fairness is a emotion.
Does anyone else have a 50 for this assignment when they did it?
because its getting pretty ridiculous.
They believe things should be fair so that creatures similar to themselves, with only a few minor differing characteristics such as outward appearances, will be placed upon an even standing with them. This reduces the need for competition for what one might find valuable and instead increases the feeling of consideration and benevolence in a society.
However, one must remember that one person is rarely ever fully "equal" with another member of society; the same is true for animals. It is upon certain differing characteristics that one is born into that provides for either a need to protect what one has or a need to fight for what one needs to obtain.
Post a Comment