OT: Of Noble Kneasies and Nasty Beasts

[Mike & Susan Gray]

Thanks Neri - that made sense!

Of course, the solution is rather simple: 

Clearly, the Kneasy in question had just seen a startlingly realistic
fata morgana, including the vision of several delectable but choosy
females of his species. In a state of intense hormonal agitation, he
followed his insticts directly to the nearest act of staggeringly heroic
malehood.

No? Ach, sorry Kneasy. Not really the fata morgana type, eh? Rats.

Anyway, Neri, your account makes an awful lot of sense - I really
enjoyed reading it!

I was also thinking about four things: (1) Don't acts of physical
bravery have the helpful trait of displaying strength, courage and other
physical and emotional traits that are only indirectly connected to
kindness and generosity? (2) Granted (1), wouldn't females (who, in our
current discussion, perpetually sit about waiting for class-A males to
show up) also gradually develop the ability to distinguish between truly
generous males and macho, show-off males? (3) Granted (2), wouldn't said
males develop a tendency to err just enough on the side of generosity to
be perceived as "truly generous" rather than "show-off macho generous"?
(4) Couldn't it be precisely this inbred error pattern that would lead
to acts of Kneasulous nobility - acts which we note as "heroic" since
they fall on the outside "generous" section of the behavioral bell
curve?

BTW, I've no doubt that you biological types have been there before and
done that three times over and will mail me the T-Shirt for a reasonable
tuition fee. I'm just having fun trying to bend my mind around the way
the game works. (And acting like the sort of male chauvenist I've always
suspected I really am.)

Neri:

> Sure, we have 
> some (very rare) cases of animals behaving altruistically [...] 
> but in none of these cases the altruist was actually putting it's 
> own life in serious danger. So until I find some counterexamples I 
> must classify Kneasy's deed as a purely human behavior pattern. My 
> apologies if this disappoints you, Kneasy <g>.

I liked that! Last year I did some ethics stuff centered partly on feral
children (which you mentioned tangentially), partly on Vicki Hearn's
discussion of virtue in dogs and horses. I'd be interested in your take
on Vicki Hearn. She argues that dogs and horses *are* noble - and noble
in exactly the same way we are - but she also argues that this shared
nobility is directly connected to our shared form of life. (And she
talks a lot about the  basic difference between dogs and wolves.)

Of course, she holds that other species have their own virutes and
nobility. It was entrancing stuff.

BTW, is there actually any proof of feral children who have been
substantially reared by animals? There are a lot of stories, but a lot
of them seem to be pretty dodgy.

Baaaaaa!

Aberforth's Goat (a.k.a. Mike Gray) 
_______________________

"Of course, I'm not entirely sure he can read, 
so that may not have been bravery...."