Moral Compass

Continuing on the musing posted on 26 January 2010 regarding the ideas in the book (that I am slowly reading) The Evolution of God.

In those primitive times, the normal person lived in a village (group) of between 30 - 50. To him the villagers were either "kin = relatives" or "non-kin = friends". All outsiders of the village were "strangers = enemies".

So his relationship to kin was conducted following "kin-selection" (technical term by them psychologists meaning that we are willing to sacrifice for close relatives). His relationship with non-kin would have been conducted in accordance with "reciprocal altruism" (ie, if I am nice to you, you will be most likely to be nice to me in return). So his behaviour in the context of the village (his "world") was always ethical. His Moral Compass was in-built and was not part of his "religion".

Another idea introduced in the book is that religion is self-serving. This is not to mean that its bad, just that it must serve our interest. Note that self-interests are not just those selfish ones that come to mind immediately. They also include the interest of the family, society, country, ethics, moral truth, and spiritual truth. The two extreme ends of this range of interests give the two views of what religion is (also the difference between the "primitive" religion and "modern" religion).

The primitive view was that there were good and there were bad Gods. They could be influenced (prayers and offerings) to be friendly to primitive man. The modern view is God is good, so we must change to be like him (God as role-model). So our Moral Compass has expanded and has become externalised in our religion.