From: BillK (email@example.com)
Date: Sun Feb 15 2009 - 07:30:11 MST
On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 2:03 PM, Petter Wingren-Rasmussen wrote:
> Abolishing slavery might just be more efficient since people that have a
> choice are more motivated to be creative and work harder, which becomes more
> important the more advanced a civilization and its technology is.
> It doesnt necessarily have much to do with ethics or choice. It might just
> be efficiency on a national level.
I agree with this position.
Matt's problem is that he is stretching evolutionary psychology too far.
Evolution certainly will remove harmful behaviors from a species over
a long period of time.
Eating your children, breeding with your children, killing everyone
you meet, etc.
But this elimination of the worst (least efficient) behaviors has
little to do with the elaborate ethical systems that humans have
constructed. It just sets boundary limits. Within the limits human
intelligence constructs a multitude of religious and ethical systems
Every nation has a different legal system, different religions,
different moral standards.
Yes, you can pick out resemblances, like no eating of children, that
are common to all of humanity. But excluding a few particular
behaviors doesn't make ethical systems at all similar.
It is tradition and human culture passed down through teaching that
makes for different ethical behaviors in Arabia, Tibet, US, Japan,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:01:04 MDT