[alatar]

Originally Posted by Legate of Amon Lanc

And so which way is it supposed to work - will it ultimately go down to "eat or you will be eaten"? Also if what Nogrod quoted is right, it doesn't work like that even among animals who have been often used (unrightfully anyway, as it's been known for a long time already) as example of the mere survival of the fittest (and in the era of enlightement as the cruel nature with claws and jaws in contrary to the reasonable human mind).

People continually get the 'survival of the fittest' idea wrong (not saying this of anyone here). Fit...this doesn't mean the strongest, prettiest/handsomest, fastest, etc. Fit...able to survive well enough to get offspring into the next generation. A platypus is not the prettiest creature, the three-toes sloth not the fastest, nor the echidna the strongest, but each survives well enough in its environment.

This way, it's not just relying on oneself, but this way also the community is capable to withstand f.ex. the natural disasters or things like that (to some scope, of course, but generally...).

What we have 'learned/evolved' is that, by forming communities, we as a species can survive better - be more fit. As stated, alone we are vulnerable. As ants have formic acid that makes them resistant to predation (except by anteaters), we have 'community.' And that community includes the weak and frail as well as the strong and swift. Not that it was always the case, but the toothless hobbled elder contributed to the community just as much as the hunting males and the gathering females.

And just from the worldwide scope, we are basically called upon to be "good" and that this "good" should have some social dimension to it. To kind of build on the words of Hakon on alatar - even if we are "just animals", the point is, what do we make out of what we have?

Today we have no excuse. It's one thing when an animal has no food or shelter for the stronger to take from the weaker, or to rid themselves of these burdens...difficult times call for difficult measures. But animals don't read genetics tomes; we do. So to 'kill off' or select for a specific type of individual type makes us vulnerable to the vagaries of the environment. We need to keep within us (as a community) the most diverse set of genes possible to ensure that we have a chance. You never know what the future will bring, like a big thumping meteor, and so we want to be sure that some will survive, whatever happens.

Frank Herbert wrote about this idea in a short story named, "Seed Stock." The 'ideal' in our eyes may be the worst choice for the survival of the species.

In regards to 'evil,' is it those instinctual animal impulses that no longer are needed in our community-adapted species that come out in certain individuals? Not to trivialize, but like teeth in chicken?

Anyway, the point is, also with their part on eating the fruit of the tree, and on the sin, they are equal - they both eat, and most of all, they both try to hide after their crime.

Some may see a reason for subordination here:

Originally Posted by YHWH in Genesis 3:16

To the woman he said, "I will greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain you will give birth to children. Your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you."

God may have created them equal, but things went awry shortly thereafter. And note that to me, both are 'equal,' though equal isn't the right word - I can't bear children, and I'm not 'the same' as my wife. Think that 'halves of whole' is better.