Hobbes

Is the "Hobbes" to which you refer the tiger from the comic strip, "Calvin and Hobbes?"

http://images.google.com/images?q=Calvin+and+hobbes&hl=en&lr=&sa=N&tab=ii&oi=imagest

That comic strip is no longer drawn, but in its day it was a true classic. Superior artwork and very, very clever writing.

* * *
You wrote (with my [inclusions])

Hobbes's work: [premise] he possibly thinks of human beings as mechanical objects, programmed as it were to pursue their self-interest. Some have suggested [conclusion] that Hobbes's mechanical world-view leaves no room for the influence of moral ideas, that that he thinks the only effective influence on our behavior are incentives of pleasure and pain.

If I accept the premise, then I've got less argument with the conclusion. If we are indeed programmed to pursue self-interest, to the exclusion of all else, then it does leave little room for the influence of moral ideas. I have stated elsewhere in this blog that on its surface, the "Sermon on the Mount" is pure rubbish. The Sermon, within the context of purely selfish beings, would be rejected out of hand. "Blessed are the meek?" No they're not -- foolish statement, therefore disregard. "Love my enemies?" Don't be ridiculous; they'll slaughter me if I don't keep my guard up.

So, if premise, then conclusion. Yes, I agree with that.

The question in my mind is whether Hobbes' position is sustainable. I think it's pretty clear there's at least an element of truth to it ... as we look around, we see an awful lot of behavior done largely out of self-interest. We respond quite readily (and predictably) to pleasure and to pain.

But is that the whole story? I'm inclined to think not ... and not just because I have a lot invested in that not being the whole story.

If I consider the world of "natural selection" and "evolution," I see no reason why altruism or kindness should exist ... except to the extent it benefits the propegation of my DNA. So acts of sacrifice for my offspring is somewhat understandable within the context of natural selection. But what about kindness to others? Some argue that there's a survival instinct that kicks in at the herd or pack level -- a kind of community altruism. I doubt that ... I doubt that's something that can be demonstrated in the wild. I'm open to being contradicted there, but I don't think there's too many examples where animals in the wild sacrifice themselves for the benefit of others in their wider social structure.

Yet humans do demonstrate that. For instance, kindness and care extended to the elderly. From a DNA perspective, it's pointless -- their contribution to the propegation of the DNA is finished. In that narrow sense, they're worthless. Yet there appears to be a long history of humans caring for their elderly, and even examples of altruism when the elderly kill themselves rather than continue to be a "burden" on the others.

Where does that come from?

Here the theology kicks in ... if indeed we are "made in God's image" -- that is, we possess qualities of being and personality like that possessed by God, then there's something within us beyond the mere programmed pain/pleasure model.

Question: are you aware of any examples of animals appearing to pause and enjoy a sunset? I'm not ... yet we do, almost universally. Why? What's that all about?

But that's the extent of my insights on that topic ... philosophy is not a strong suit of mine. I'm easily tripped up by the dense language used.

Your turn -- do you think we're merely programmed beings, whose primary stimulus is the pain/pleasure variables?