Re: Social Evolution

  “If you reject social evolution based on prior theological beliefs, aren't you doing the same thing as those who reject biological evolution based on the same beliefs?” – David Opderbeck
   
  Please help me to clarify here. Is this thread about ‘social evolution’ or ‘biotic evolution’? What’s the logic? Is it about 'sociological evolution' or 'biological evolution'? Or is it about evolutionary ethics, which are often (or rarely) considered a topic for philosophy?
   
  At least I didn’t think the thread was about (true, robust) ‘social Darwinism’ until David started repeating ‘social Darwinism’ (7 times in 3 paragraphs) like it was a scarecrow in a lonely field. Reality today shows that evolutionary theories have penetrated social thought much more deeply than simple ‘Darwinism’ might suggest. It would be skirting the issue(s) or diverting from the (non-legalistic) topic to deny this.
   
  “[P]rinciples analogous to Darwin's have operated in the evolution of societies.” – Dr. Allan Harvey
   
  Many qualifying questions if a discussion is to be rigorous and fruitful about this topic.
   
  Arago
   
   
  p.s. the Calvin comment seemed out of bounds

David Opderbeck <dopderbeck@gmail.com> wrote: Speaking of a "moral compass" within the context of social Darwinism is no different than speaking of "irreducible complexity" in traditional biological evolution.

                
---------------------------------
Find your next car at Yahoo! Canada Autos
Received on Tue Jan 24 17:51:05 2006