An Analysis of Matt Ridley’s The Origins of Virtue :: Philosophy Essays

An Analysis of insipid Ridleys The Origins of Virtue Inwardly examining his own nature, military man would prefer to see himself as a virtuously courageous macrocosm designed in the image of a divine supernatural force. Not to say that the true nature of man is a pick out beast, he does posses, interchangeable many new(prenominal) creatures admirable traits. As author Matt Ridley examines the nature of man in his work The Origins of Virtue, both the selfish and selfless sides of man atomic number 18 explored. Upon making an honest and accurate assessment of his character, it seems evident that man is not such a creature divinely set by from the trappings of selfishness and immorality. instead than put man at either extreme it seems more accurate to describe man as a creature whose mark is to look come forward for himself first, as a means of survival. It is true that on many levels humans act in a cooperative way to benefit all-- but does that instance a claim th at man is genetically altruistic? Perhaps the reasoning behind his actions would lead to another view. As Ridley examines mans dependency upon others in his species, it becomes apparent that man is not necessarily a savage beast out to do everyone in, but rather a lone creature essay to ensure his survival. In comparing man as the lone hunter to the cooperative being he is today it is evident that his species has thrived and defyd with much greater informality in a cooperative society as opposed to a lone hunter. Though it can be easily argued that this cooperation between man, is at roughly level a sort of mutual altruism, it may better be understood as a selfish means of survival. The saying goes that there is sentry duty in numbers, this could not be more true for mans plight. Because alone man stands little chance of perpetuating his genes, he flocks to the community where he has the better chance of survival, as do his genes. So to better understand the reasoning behin d mans need to be in the community it is imperative to look at nature. In the tearing and brutal spirited of life the only measure of true advantage is whether genes are passed on. Like any other animal this measure of success measures mans success too. For all creatures, to survive is the chance at continuing a gene line, and it is this necessity to continue the line that is innately imbedded in man and all other creatures.An Analysis of Matt Ridleys The Origins of Virtue Philosophy EssaysAn Analysis of Matt Ridleys The Origins of Virtue Inwardly examining his own nature, man would prefer to see himself as a virtuously courageous being designed in the image of a divine supernatural force. Not to say that the true nature of man is a complete beast, he does posses, like many other creatures admirable traits. As author Matt Ridley examines the nature of man in his work The Origins of Virtue, both the selfish and altruistic sides of man are explored. Upon making an honest and accurate assessment of his character, it seems evident that man is not such a creature divinely set apart from the trappings of selfishness and immorality. Rather than put man at either extreme it seems more accurate to describe man as a creature whose tendency is to look out for himself first, as a means of survival. It is true that on many levels humans act in a cooperative way to benefit all-- but does that warrant a claim that man is genetically altruistic? Perhaps the reasoning behind his actions would lead to another view. As Ridley examines mans dependency upon others in his species, it becomes apparent that man is not necessarily a savage beast out to do everyone in, but rather a lone creature trying to ensure his survival. In comparing man as the lone hunter to the cooperative being he is today it is evident that his species has thrived and survived with much greater ease in a cooperative society as opposed to a lone hunter. Though it can be easily argued that this coope ration between man, is at some level a sort of mutual altruism, it may better be understood as a selfish means of survival. The saying goes that there is safety in numbers, this could not be more true for mans plight. Because alone man stands little chance of perpetuating his genes, he flocks to the community where he has the better chance of survival, as do his genes. So to better understand the reasoning behind mans need to be in the community it is imperative to look at nature. In the wild and brutal game of life the only measure of true success is whether genes are passed on. Like any other animal this measure of success measures mans success too. For all creatures, to survive is the chance at continuing a gene line, and it is this necessity to continue the line that is innately imbedded in man and all other creatures.