From: CurtAdams@aol.com
Date: Wed Apr 03 2002 - 08:55:51 MST
In a message dated 4/3/02 7:35:20, jacques@dtext.com writes:
>A more modest one, content with life as it is now would be: No. So
>let's regulate as much as possible and delay the chaos as long as
>possible. (Fukuyama)
Fukuyama, and most such people, neglect that human nature will
change anyway. Human nature (by which I mean our biological
leanings and some cultural responses to those leanings) evolved
in a particular environment. We are now in a very different
environment and the "nature" which will maximize long-term
reproduction is going to be very different. In particular, the
desire to limit reproduction under certain circumstances,
probably adaptive in a world of shortage and periodic famine,
now greatly reduces reproduction. Desire and ability for
education apparently activate reproductive limitation in an
educated society, so those are on the chopping block too. There's
a lot of worship, almost literally, of "DNA" and "nature" but DNA
is a virus; driven to reproduce as much as possible, mindless,
and heedless of any side effect that don't interfere with its goal.
Genes and culture have complex interactions, both symbiotic and
antagonistic. It's the cultural aspects which include most of what we
consider good about being human. Some genes support those aspects
and some oppose them. The genes that oppose many good aspects of
culture are assaulting them now and will gain the upper hand if we
just ignore things and let evolution have its way.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:13 MST