Re: It begins


"Les Cargill" <lcargill@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4809616a$0$3392$4c368faf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Mjg1NDg2ZDM5YTMwMGFiZGNhNTU5M2MwOTQ2NGE1Mjc=

If Darwin cannot be understood, then all this ... article makes
sense, I suppose.

The guy is clearly a moron.

Note this passage:
"Like Hitler, Charles Darwin saw natural processes as setting moral
standards. It's all in The Descent of Man, where he explains that, had we
evolved differently, we would have different moral ideas. On a particularly
delicate moral topic, for example, he wrote: 'We may, therefore, reject the
belief, lately insisted on by some writers, that the abhorrence of incest is
due to our possessing a special God-implanted conscience.' "

In the previous paragraph, he writes, "The key elements in the ideology that
produced Auschwitz are moral relativism aligned with a rejection of the
sacredness of human life..."

But the clear implication of the first paragraph I quoted is that at least
the general outlines of human morality are _innate_. While not the same as
saying that they're God-given, that morals have evolved via natural
selection resulting in _homo sapiens_ equipped with a moral instinct is
logically inconsistent with absolute moral relativism.

He also clearly fails to understand the difference between "is" and "ought".

<snip>


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Darwins Paradox
    ... I think you misrepresent Darwin to a degree here. ... The Continuity of Man and Animals ... and therefore they have acquired these by natural selection. ... and individual habits in morals. ...
    (sci.bio.evolution)
  • Re: Darwin: Was he a Nazi
    ... >>> And what does Darwin's politics, or morals, or toilet habits, have to do ... Darwin was not really an axe murderer. ... >Yes, I've read these many responses, but I still find them rather ... The can of worms seems to be your substitute for a conscience. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: It begins
    ... Charles Darwin saw natural processes as setting moral standards. ... While not the same as saying that they're God-given, that morals have evolved via natural selection resulting in _homo sapiens_ equipped with a moral instinct is logically inconsistent with absolute moral relativism. ... It can't be considered innate. ...
    (sci.econ)
  • Re: The principle of open debate and hearing both sides
    ... I reject moral relativism. ... Where I live morals are often claimed to be relative to culture. ... should thoughtlessly follow tradition, are not moral claims so much as ...
    (uk.philosophy.humanism)