Generosity May be in the Genes?
Firstly, as I have already mentioned in other essays, such studies basically serve to take self-control away from humans as opposed to impressing upon them the need to be altruistic instead of being opportunistic and self-absorbed if they are not simultaneously complemented by the work of social scientists. Perhaps my issue with such articles is that sociological views do not accompany them to counter any tendencies amongst the masses of readers to interpret them self-servingly or/and unintelligently.
Secondly, if such studies do not incite investigators to perform longitudinal studies for the purpose of discerning if being AVPR1a-deficient is an inborn deficiency, then its impact would be confined to allowing people to add a disclaimer for their selfish acts with a, ‘Sorry mate, me AVPR1a deficient’ and excuse themselves from buying a round of drinks.
Thirdly, even if it is found, after longitudinal studies, that the aforementioned deficiency is inborn, this only argues for the case that we are a product of evolution. In this case, the negative impact of competitive and exploitative human history can be plausibly held up as the reason for the current non-altruistic tendencies of the masses.
Fourthly, rather than excuse the masses from exhibiting altruism, it might be prudential to view it as a reason why people ought to intentionally practice altruism so that future generations may not be similarly impaired.
Finally, people ought to start inquiring after how and if the current global socio-politico-economic milieu serves to ensure that future generations are or are not born with such deficiencies and the degree to which this retardation is pervasive. If not, we are not far off from taking as fact that humans are competitive and opportunistic beasts and proceed with evolution from that point.
Ed-infinitum
singapore malaysia hong kong thailand india taiwan japan asia uk australia philosophy psychology culture sociology capitalism
Comments