Re: Evolution - Re: Ethics

Kevin Koenig (Koenig@stlzoo.org)
Fri, 06 Feb 1998 10:05:39 -0600

>>> E G M <e_g_m@yahoo.com> 02/05/98 09:16am >>>
Assuming that Darwinism is true, the statement by KK could be
also true but only in a limited way. Darwinism would also compell
us to survive as individuals or nations in which cases the ethics
are only relative, or is there anything ethical about, say, slavery?

"is there anything ethical about, say, slavery?"
KK> No there isn't.

According to the group selection theory a group of individuals or a
population that uses violence to solve conflicts is at a
disadvantage. A population that uses threats or that is
non-aggressive has the advantage.

It is possible that a surviving aggressive individual could meld into
a non-aggressive group. It is also possible that a member of a
non-aggressive population may decide not to abide by the
advantageous non-aggressor rules. Over time a non-aggressive
population could lose its shared advantage.

Entropy?

Kevin