TheFallibleFiend wrote:
tff: "The altruism debate seems related to the freewill debate. It's something that I just don't think we have enough knowledge to definitely answer right now."
SH: "So that is your "definite answer" on the issue?"
TFF: "That is my answer until I stumble on to a stronger conclusion that has some consensus in the scientific community."
tff: "Just because something can reasonbly be explained by X doesn't mean that X is the explanation."
sh: "What about reason and logic - are you saying that it is absolutely impossible for us to use those tools to uncover the truth about things? "
What about reason and logic? It takes more to be reasonable and logical than merely to invoke the words. A thing can sound reasonable and be logically consistent and yet have no discernable correspondence with physical reality. That's why science exists - a scientific theory has to produce testable hypotheses which would disprove it, if it were wrong. This is the central point that separates modern science from religion.
I'm not asserting that altruism is more than illusory, nor am I asserting that the question is inherently unanswerable. Right now you have explanations - that's a good start. Are there experiments you might devise that could disprove a generalized statement of these explanations, if it they are wrong?
