On 1 Sep 2008, at 04:17, Dan M wrote: > That all sounds reasonable to me. But, if one also Googles Social > Darwinism, > one finds numerous references that list a number of folks who > believed in > it, including a number who clearly spent more than 10 minutes > thinking about > ethics. Now, I don't think they thought all that well, but it's not > what I > consider a straw man because it is a view that was (and is) held by > many.
It's not a view held by anyone on this list, so who are you arguing with? Hence strawman. > > > Indeed, I know that I've argued strongly with list members against > evolutionary ethics while you were on the list. So, folks I'm > trying to > discuss things with do believe in things that fall under this > umbrella...so > I'm not sure how it's a straw man. The question of how we come to have ethical ideas is a different kind of question, with a different kind of answer, than the question of what is good. The question 'where do our ethical ideas come from' has the answer 'our nature as social mammals'. The question 'how do we tell good from bad' does not have the answer 'our nature as social mammals'. Category Mistake Maru -- William T Goodall Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web : http://www.wtgab.demon.co.uk Blog : http://radio.weblogs.com/0111221/ "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." ~Voltaire. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
