From: Keith Henson (hkhenson@rogers.com)
Date: Fri Aug 25 2006 - 05:04:50 MDT
Humans have a sense of what is moral. Like all such psychological traits
it is the result of evolution.
On that basis, one can predict that what we consider moral is that which is
good for the survival of our genes or a side effect of evolution in hunter
gatherer bands where the people around us tended to be related (inclusive
fitness).
What is good for the survival of genes is environmentally influenced if not
determined. So what we consider moral should be flexible to the
environmental situation.
I could provide and analyze lots of supporting examples. But can anyone
think of a counter example where this is not true?
Keith Henson
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:57 MDT