Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (117355)	12/18/2000 1:55:45 AM
From: D. Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

I think it is necessary to prevent the kind of bias that afflicts sociology, for example. Projecting evolutionary absolutism onto primative cultures develops bad theory. Think of it this way - anthropology is about studying the different ways humans adapt to stress and limited resources. But anyway, I see what you are saying. I don't want to get back into a protracted debate on anthropology, I think we covered it last time. ;) Derek

To: Neocon who wrote (117355)	12/18/2000 4:46:37 PM
From: Johannes Pilch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

The question is, does relativism make any sense even from a scientific point of view? I think not, and now I understand your claim of innate "morality" in nature. While my definition yet requires clear and direct authority, I think there is indeed a certain natural and common progression of human society, and thus an implied optimum state of human existence. From this vantagepoint, relativism makes no sense. We are all by nature attempting to travel in essentially the same direction. Some of us are getting there faster than others, and it would perhaps benefit humankind if we, while remaining sympathetic, would recognize it. It will no doubt sound harsh (but what the hay, you folks can't shoot me, I don't think), but we perhaps should no more aim to preserve undeveloped attributes in certain cultures anymore than we should preserve childhood in humans. But then again, perhaps Rousseau was right and civilization as we know it is a corrupter of natural human virtue.