> Even monkeys have evolved forms of altruistic behaviour I'm sorry, but I can't agree with this kind of point. Ok, maybe by looking very closely, one could fi

> Even monkeys have evolved forms of altruistic behaviour I'm sorry, but I can't agree with this kind of point. Ok, maybe by looking very closely, one could find traces of altruistic behaviors in monkey societies, but this cannot count as an argument against the amorality of Nature. Because it would mean to take the exception for the normality. Any unskewed view on natural behavior in animals is just saying the plain obvious: animals do not care at all if they inflict pain to other animals or kill them, except for their offspring. This is the norm, the natural way. You can count the exceptions, it will not change the norm. On the opposite, in human societies, it happens that some people do not care (do not feel anything) when they inflict pain on other beings, but this is the exception, not the norm. And this has been built very slowly against nature, by the process of civilization (in the good old "natural" times, most human did not care if people of other race or slaves were suffering). So let's not forget that. Nature is beautiful, but it feels nothing, we feel for her.