LordReed:


Which dictionary did you check?




Which secondary sources talk about Jesus' burial in a tomb?

Person wey no go primary school still dey demand for secondary school ni?

keppler:

Read up about the development of human civilisations. You will note how human societies went from small closely related family groups to the large cities and nation states we have now.

Good place to start: https://humanorigins.si.edu/human-characteristics/social-life


I laughed hard when reading your link.
Let me put it in perspective
Me: "Show me where and when humans realized that the best way to survive is due to cooperation" (of course, which apparently birthed morality)
Reed: "We've found evidence of ancient humans in groups. Therefore, they cooperated to enhance their chance of survival"
That's funny I believe but that's what could be inferred from your link. (as related to my question?
Maybe I'm wrong sha, you could kindly show me evidence of such history when they realized that coming together is the solution.

Wait, are you asking for a specific date and event?

Yes there is. Read: Evolution and Cognitive Development http://web.missouri.edu/~gearyd/EvoCogDev%5BChap%5D.pdf

I must confess, I was disappointed.
I was expecting to see mechanisms, that through the known path ways put forward for evolution or otherwise, would explain how organisms should develop abilities such as: abstract thinking, planning, comprehension of complex ideas and maybe languages (which are obviously the abilities that separates us from animals). I don't think anyone need paper to explain that experience is the best teacher which is the general tone of the message therein.
What we want to see is mechanisms for those abilities I mentioned, which the paper itself calls nonevolved cognitive competencies. In fact, it says in a place that this type seems designed. Implication of which I should be silent, after all, the "holy" word - evolution has been used to saturate the piece.

I may be wrong anyway, so you could kindly provide the mechanism for such abilities that I claimed that animals can never develop from the paper.

Read the conclusion for a summary of the mechanisms. As for the specific cognitive functions you mentioned I dunno if you are aware that several types of animals have displayed some form of these cognitiveabilities, such as problem solving, tool use, communication, language, theory of mind, culture, agriculture, self recognition, object permanence, social learning, episodic memory, etc. When you say animals can never develop cognitive abilities what exactly do you mean.

Of course it is anthropomorphising them, that's the way we make sense of the world.
Let me also put this in perspective (and of course, no need for the low blows. I removed them here but intact in your mention anyway)
data about chimpanzee (from journals): We discovered that Chimpanzees will prefer not to work with any individual chimpanzee which are seen to sabotage group effort of acquiring food and dominants of the group will aggressively attack the freeloader in most cases to retrieve their meals, while subordinates to the free loaders would prefer to collapse meal so that no one gets the food.
Popular science media: Like Humans, Chimps Reward Cooperation and Punish Freeloaders and other misleading interpretations.
Reed: Chimpanzees are known to punish members of group for violating social codes.

Very funny way of anthropomorphism which directly changed the meaning of observed phenomenon. In fact, what was observed was what should be expected and has nothing to do with our definition of morality.

What is the definition of morality?

Is this not what we see playing out in the world? Even your bible says the Israelites killed off portions of the Levant in order to establish themselves, was it good for the victims? Nope. Thankful that type of dynamic has slowly evolved away, we are now largely a cooperative group, we are learning more and more how to share finite resources and how to build systems that allow us to stretch those resources to benefit more people. Is it prefect? Nope. Will it be? I doubt it. No human system so far is prefect, not even religious ones that claim to be birthed by the inspiration of otherworldly beings called gods.
No need to resort to the Tu Quoque fallacy, or low blows. You should only defend your claim.
Your claim: "Those things that help survival of the group are seen as good and the ones that don't are seen as bad"
Do you stand by this your claim?
If yes, using this example:
To reduce competition for food, a group attack to kill or drive another group from that source of food
Is this an example of goodness?

You have a funny way of looking at conversations. I give you an example of the thing you are asking me and I answered your question that it was not good for the victims and you call it a fallacy. Also I have properly addressed your question, it was not good for the victims even though the group who took the action thought it was but our morality has evolved away from that type of behaviour.

LordReed:


Wait, are you asking for a specific date and event?




Read the conclusion for a summary of the mechanisms. As for the specific cognitive functions you mentioned I dunno if you are aware that several types of animals have displayed some form of these cognitiveabilities, such as problem solving, tool use, communication, language, theory of mind, culture, agriculture, self recognition, object permanence, social learning, episodic memory, etc. When you say animals can never develop cognitive abilities what exactly do you mean.



What is the definition of morality?



You have a funny way of looking at conversations. I give you an example of the thing you are asking me and I answered your question that it was not good for the victims and you call it a fallacy. Also I have properly addressed your question, it was not good for the victims even though the group who took the action thought it was but our morality has evolved away from that type of behaviour.

Your morality keeps evolving to suit your whims. Tomorrow when your morality evolves to kill us all like Mao, what should we do? Who exactly determines this evolution of morality? What happens to those of us whose morals refuse to evolve?