He's wrong. There's no moral behaviour observed in nature. In fact, some behaviour observed are utterly immoral, if you could call it that. For example, male lions gladly kill cubs when they take over a pride. Another example, some chimps kill and eat babies recently born in their own groups.
Yes, humans tend to behave in certain ways, but that's not because we are made [by some supreme creator] that way. It's called evolutionary behaviour. Simply, humans that behaved in certain ways, ways that were beneficial to the survival of their own group/tribe, were more likely to survive themselves.
One of these is right. If there is no morality in nature, then morality cannot arise from natural causes, irrespective of evolution. If there is morality in nature, then it is possible for it to become refined through evolution.
I'm not convinced that all moral behaviours have an evolutionary advantage, there are many that are very counterproductive in terms of ensuring that your genes are passed on.
Secondly, there is no genetic mechanism to pass on moral behaviours. Just because two saints have kids does not mean that their kids are going to be saints.
Comment