Re: [asa] Neo-Darwinism and God's action

Burgy, I was trying to be careful by arguing that other creatures can't make
moral and aesthetic judgments "in the same way" as humans. I agree that
some very intelligent animals can make judgments that appear to have some
characteristics that we might call "moral" or "aesthetic." But I would
argue that the human capacity here is qualitatively and quantitatively on a
dramatically different level than that of even the most intelligent
non-human creatures (of which we are aware).

On Feb 18, 2008 3:16 PM, j burg <hossradbourne@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2/18/08, David Opderbeck <dopderbeck@gmail.com> wrote:". . . Human
> beings are able to make judgments that other creatures (as far as we
> know) cannot make in the same way -- e.g., moral and aesthetic
> judgments.
> . . . . Unless you're a thorough-going materialistic determinist,
> you have to concede that the human "mind" allows us to transcend
> evolution in a way that does not seem to be available to other
> creatures."
>
> The book WHEN ELEPHANTS WEEP (see my PSCF review at
> www.burgy.50megs.com) presents evidences that argue, in my mind
> convincingly, that animals other than humanity CAN and DO make both
> moral and aesthetic judgements.
>
> I am not a "thorough-going materialistic determinist" by any means,
> but I claim that a human's capability to "transcend evolution" appears
> to be a difference of degree, and not a difference of kind.
>
> Burgy
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Feb 18 15:29:47 2008